i 


OF    THE 

PROCEEDINGS 

OF    THE 

PRESBYTERY  OP  GLASGOW, 

RELATIVE    TO    THE    USE    OF    AN 

ORGAN  IN  ST.  ANDREWS  CHURCH. 

In  the  Public  Worship  of  God. 
TO    WHICH    IS    ANNEXED, 

iflJV  ADDRESS 

TO  THE  REVEREND  JUDICATORIES  OF  THE  PRESBYTERIAN 
CHURCH  IN  THE  UNITED  STATES  j 

By  a  Lay  Member. 


PHILADELPHIA 

PBICTED    TOR   THE    PUBLISHERS  J   AND    SOLD   BY    D.    HOGA> 
J.  Anderson,  Printer. 

1821. 


/ 


PREFACE 

FOR  THE  AMERICAN  EDITION. 

TO  those  who  profess  to  maintain  any  steady  and 
uniform  adherence  to  the  constitutional  standards  of  the 
Presbyterian  church,  in  these  States,  or  to  the  purity 
and  simplicity  of  Gospel  worship,  it  is  hoped  that  the 
following  Discussion,  however  distant  as  to  local  situa- 
tion, will  not  prove  uninteresting-. 

In  every  period  of  the  church  of  Christ,  its  truth 
and  simplicity  have  been  invaded,  not  only  by  the  pro- 
pensity of  the  world  at  large,  but  even  that  of  its  own 
professors  themselves,  to  a  sensual  and  pompous  wor- 
ship. Not  all  the  express  and  positive  precepts,  nor 
all  the  blessed  example  of  its  divine  Author  himself, 
have  been,  even  to  this  day,  effectual  for  the  entire  sup- 
pression and  restraint  of  these  vain  and  delusive  work- 
ings of  the  unregenerated  hearts  of  the  children  of  men. 

In  that  tribute  of  homage  and  praise,  especially, 
which  we  owe  to  our  God  and  Saviour,  and  that  too, 
in  all  the  renovated  and  exalted  strain  of  evangelical 
gratitude,  how  prone  are  we,  individually  and  collec- 
tively, to  listen  to  the  syren  sounds  of  sensual  delusion ; 
and  even  to  aim  at  the  wafting  of  our  holiest  aspirations 
to  heaven,  through  the  medium  of  other  sounds  than 
those  that  can  issue  from  the  heart  ? 

In  Old  Testament  times,  indeed,  when  mental  and 
spiritual  exercise  had  few,  if  any,  means  of  being  sub- 
limated from  the  grossness  of  sensual  delusion,  it  pleased 
God  to  indulge  his  people  and  worshipping  servants, 
with  some  condescension  to  their  weakness  and  imper- 
fection, in  this  respect.  In  divine  consistency,  however, 
with  his  most  gracious  purposes,  as  well  as  with  his 
promises  of  a  more  spiritual  worship,  those  very  means 
}>»>  converted  into  types  and  shadows  of  those  more 


i\  PRE 

simple,  spiritual  and  sublime  joys,  which  bis  church 
was  to  exercise  and  enjoy  under  the  Gospel. 

This  Gospel,  in  all  its  spiritual  and  simplified  efful- 
gence, we  do  enjoy,  agreeably  to  his  most  gracious  pro- 
mise. It  has  been  committed  to  US,  in  all  its  perfection 
of  truth,  as  well  as  in  that  purity  and  simplicity  exhi- 
bited in  the  example  of  our  Lord  and  his  apostles.  The 
Gospel  day  hath  indeed  dawned  on  a  sensual  and  be- 
lted world.  Some  of  its  meridian  rays  have  indeed 
arisen  upon  us;  and  yet,  alas!  how  reluctant  do  we 
seem,  that  those  shadows,  which  have  so  lonu 
them,  should,  forever,  u  ilee  away"? 

Tht1  inroads,  therefore,  whether  more  secret  or  m 
avowed,  which  have  been,  and  still  continue  to  be,  mad*' 
on  the  purest  features  of  the  Gospel  service,  in 
corner  of  the  Christian  church,  should  be  the  subj< 
our  deepest  regret. 

Without  extending  our  views  to  distant  si 
or  to  different  denominations  from  those  professing  any 
faithful  adherence  to  our  u  Directory  for  Worship,3 

only  adopted — adopted  with  all  the  holy  sanctit) 
of  obligatory  vows,  how  awful  should  be  our  n  flections 
on  any  innovations  ?  How  conscious  of  having  incurred 
the  guilt  of  a  tacit  acquiescence  with  wilful  aberration 
from  spiritual  worship ;  and,  in  this  respect,  an  ?/>?- 
aunclioned  conformity  to  the  pride  and  fashions  of  this 
world  ? 

In  the  nominally  Christian  world,  under  this  sad 
delusion,  many  still  retain  in  their  public  service  of 
Go<),  sucn  incense,  as  is  felt  to  be  most  agreeable  to 
their  sense  of  odoriferous  perfume  and  fragrance, — 
Others  can  find  but  little  relish  for  religious  service, 
but  through  the  luxurious  symphony  of  instrumental 
and  vocal  sound  ;  and  that  under  the  direction,   not    of 

the  most  pious,  but  rather  of  the  most  refined  proficient 

in  the  musical  art — While  not  a  few,  who  would  seem 

to  have  ;i  more  exalted  and  sublime  sense  of  Gospel 
worship,  are  led  to  succumb  and  to  acquiesce;  under 
tin-  timid  apprehension  of  being  considered,  either  de- 
tinue of  all  refinement  and  taste,  or  as  weakly  wedded 


PREFACE.  \ 

to  a  mode  of  praising  God,  too  unembellisbed  for  po- 
lished society  ;  however  sanctioned  it  may  have  been 
by  the  example  of  our  Lord  and  Master. 

Thus  do  we  find,  that  not  only  does  depravity  re- 
ceive countenance  in  holy  things ;  but  that,  while  we 
become  the  illegitimate  compilers  with  the  advocates  of 
musical  harmony  of  sound;  we  are  promoting  jarring 
and  discord  in  the  church  of  Christ ;  and  substituting 
for  the  discountenanced  simplicity  of  that  service, 
whose  melodies  can  flow  only  from  the  heart,  a  vain 
and  pompous  combination  of  sounds,  that  not  seldom 
puts  to  silence  more  than  one  half  the  worshippers, 
even  in  the  house  of  God. 

Let  the  impartial  weigh  these  awful  considerations. 
Instances  are  become  too  notorious  to  escape  the  obser- 
vation even  of  the  ungodly  themselves.  Are  not  such 
innovations  either  totally  winked  at,  or  shamefully  ac- 
quiesced with,  by  those  whose  sacred  office  it  is  to  in- 
culcate a  far  different  spirit  and  practice  ? 

Is  it  not  true,  that  in  some  of  our  churches,  indivi- 
duals, of  conscientious  feeling  in  this  respect,  have  re- 
fused to  minister  ?  Has  not  the  aged  and  devout  wor- 
shipper, rather  than  comply,  for  example's  sake  to  his 
family,  been  induced  to  walk  out,  after  service  had  com- 
menced, with  his  Bible  in  the  one  hand,  and  his  Psalm 
Book  in  the  other  ? 

Has  this  innovation  hitherto  excited  no  division — 
occasioned  no  discord  in  any  church  ?  Is  there  no  in- 
stance among  us,  of  its  rising  over  all  regard  for  con- 
gregational privilege  and  right.  Has  it  subjected  no 
individual  member  or  minister,  opposed  to  such  an  in- 
road, to  not  only  an  exemption  from  any  thing  like  bro- 
therly kindness,  but  to  an  obloquy  bordering  on  perse- 
cution itself : 

If  to  these  inquiries  no  negative  reply  can  be  given 
— and  that  such  a  state  of  things  actually  exists,  and  is 
allowed  to  pass  on  without  notice  or  censure — What, 
may  we  not  ask,  is  become  of  the  watchmen  of  Zion  ? 
What  avail  our  inquiries,  or  our  reports,  on  this  head, 
in    the  churches  within   our  connexion  ?     Or.  mav  it 


M  PREFACE. 

not  be  reasonably  asked,  What  mounds  or  bulwarks 
can  we  hope  to  see  successful,  for  guarding  and  securing 
the  purity  and  simplicity  of  Gospel  worship? 

From  the  following  interesting  Discussion,  we  learn, 
how  innovations  are  attempted;  and,  also,  how  they 
have  been  successfully  resisted,  in  a  most  respectable 
portion  of  the  Presbyterian  church ;  not  less  acquainted, 
surely,  than  we  are,  with  those  principles  on  which  it 
was  founded  at  the  Reformation.  On  some  occasions, 
we  seem  jealous,  and  not  seldom  justly,  of  foreign  aber- 
rations from  ministerial  fidelity,  as  well  as  from  the 
truths  of  the  Gospel.  But,  a  laying  aside  all  partiality,"5 
let  us  be  equally  jealous  over  ourselves;  and,  while  we 
deem  it  to  be  our  sacred  duty  u  to  bear  and  forbear" 
with  one  another,  in  our  own  infirmities,  as  well  with 
those  of  others,  not  in  our  connexion ;  let  us,  never- 
theless, be  carefully  and  zealously  alive  to  a  just  dis- 
crimination between  what  this  duty  demands,  and  a 
criminal  acquiescence  with  unsanctioned  innovations, 
either  in  doctrine  or  in  worship.  Whatever  tends  to 
sap  the  constitutional  foundation  on  which  alone  these 
can  and  should  rest,  can  never  be  smoothed  over  as  a 
point  of  minor  importance — can  receive  neither  salvo 
nor  authority  for  the  turpitude  of  acquiescence,  under 
any  pretext  whatever. 

To  be  instrumental,  in  any  degree,  in  maintaining 
the  purity  of  our  church  against  all  innovation,  and 
especially  in  public  and  social  worship,  has  been  the 
sole  motive  of  those  who  have  had  the  principal  share 
in  submitting  tfie  following  publication  to  the  considera- 
tion of  their  fellow  Christians;  and.  in  whatever  spirit 
it  may  be  received,  or  however  useful,  or  otherwise,  ir 
may  be  found  tor  that  design,  they  shall,  at  least,  have 
satisfied  the  dictates  of  their  own  consciences;  and 
leave  the  issue  with  Him,  who  alone  can  give  success  to 
all  they  can  aim  at.  for  his  glofy,  and  for  his  praise 
upon  earth. 


CONTENTS. 


Minute  of  the  Presbytery  of  Glasgow,  Sept.  2d,  1807,     Page  1 
First  Letter,  Lord  Provost  to  the  Presbytery,  26th  August, 

1807, 1 

Extract  from  the  City  Council  Records  of  Glasgow,  Sep- 
tember 8th,  1806,   2 

Dr.  Ritchie's  Letter  to  Provost  John  Hamilton,      ....     3 
Petition  of  Gentlemen  who  possess  Seats  in  St.  Andrew's 

Church,  to  City  Council, 4 

Mr.  Reddies  Letter,  6th  September,  1806, 7 

First  Letter,  the  Lord  Provost  to  Dr.  Ritchie,  22d  August, 

1807, 12 

Dr.  Ritchie's  Answer  to  the  Lord  Provost, 13 

Second  Letter,  the  Lord  Provost  to  Dr.  Ritchie,  26th  Au- 
gust, 1807, 13 

Second  Letter  of  the  Lord  Provost  to  the  Presbytery,  2d 

September,  1807, 15 

Minute  of  Presbytery,  September  2d,  1807,       16 

Minute  of  Presbytery,  October  7th,  1807, 17 

Minute  of  Presbytery,  November  4th,  1807, 18 

Reasons  of  Dissent,  13th  October,  1807, 18 

Answers  to  Reasons  of  Dissent,  2d  December,  1807,      .     .  22 

Minute  of  Presbytery,  January  6th,  1808, 46 

Dr.  Taylor's,  jun.  Explanation,  January  5th,  1808,     -     .     .  46 
Dr.  Lockhart's  Explanation, 51 


1  ONTENTS. 

Dr.  Ritchie  >  Statement,  Gth  January,  1808,  .  .  .  Pagt  53 
Minutes  off  Presbytery,  February  3d,  and  March  30th,  1S08,  62 
\ib\ver  for  the  Presbytery  to  Dr.  Ritchie's  Statement,  83 

Minute  of  Presbytery,  May  4th,  1808, 175 

Conclusion, 178 

Address  to  the  Judicatories  of  the  Presbyterian  Church,  in 

the  United  States, 193 

Copy  of  a  Letter  to  the  Incorporated  Committee,  Sec.   .        >1\1 


STATEMENT,  &c 


Minute  of  the  Presbytery  of  Glasgow. 

September  2d,  1807. 

TWO  letters  from  the  Lord  Provost  of  the  city 
of  Glasgow,  respecting  an  Organ  having  been 
introduced  into  St.  Andrew's  church,  were  pro- 
duced and  read.  Also  produced  and  read,  copy 
of  letters,  Provost  Mackenzie  and  Dr.  Ritchie; — 
and  extract  from  the  records  of  the  Town  Coun- 
cil of  Glasgow.  The  tenor  of  all  the  foresaid 
productions  follows. 


First  Letter  Lord  Provost  to  the  Presbytery, 

Rfv    Str  Glasgow,  26th  August,  1807, 

In  discharge  of  the  legal  duty  incumbent  on 
civil  magistrates,  patrons  of  churches,  and  heri- 
tors of  parishes,  I  beg  leave,  on  the  part  of  the 
magistrates  and  council  of  this  city,  to  intimate 
to  the  reverend  Presbytery  of  Glasgow,  that,  ac- 
cording to  information  I  have  received,  an  Organ 
has  recently  been  placed  in  St.  Andrew's  church, 
by  the  minister  and  congregation  of  that  parish. 
1 


) 


and  was  used  on  Sunday  last,  while  the  eoiu 
gation  was  assembled  for  the  purpose  of  divine 
worship. 

Whether  the  introduction  of  Organs  into  our 
established  churches,  be  an  improvement  or  not, 
is  the  province  of  the  ecclesiastical  judicatories, 
not  of  the  civil  magistrates,  to  determine.  And 
that  the  reverend  Presbytery  may  know  the  line 
of  conduct  which  the  magistrates  and  council 
have  thought  it  right  to  observe  on  this  occasion, 
I  transmit  a  copy  of  the  answer  which  they  re- 
turned in  the  month  of  September  last,  to  an  ap- 
plication from  the  minister  and  congregation  of 
St.  Andrew's  church;  and  also  copies  of  two 
official  letters  which  I  have  addressed  to  the  Rev. 
Dr.  Ritchie  on  the  subject,  and  of  his  answer  to 
one  of  them. — I  am,  with  much  respect, 
Rev.  Sir, 
Your  most  obedient  servant, 

(Signed)  James  Mackenzie. 

Lord  Pro^ 
The  Rev.  Dr.  William  Taylor,  Mode- 
rator of  the  Presbytery  of  Glasgow. 


Extract  from    the    Town    Council   Records  of 
Glasgow. 

At  Glasgow,  the  eighth  day  of  September, 

eighteen  hundred  and  six  years; 

Which  day  the  magistrates  and  council  of  the 

city  of  Glasgow,  being  in  council  assembled,  The 

Lord  Provost*  laid  before  the  magistrates  and 

Provost  John  Hamilton. 


council  a  letter  from  the  Rev.  Dr.  Ritchie,  minis- 
ter of  St.  Andrew's  church,  and  a  petition  from 
a  number  of  respectable  inhabitants  who  possess 
seats  in  that  church,  requesting  the  permission  of 
the  magistrates  and  council,  as  heritors,  to  make 
such  alterations  in  the  seats  behind  the  pulpit,  as 
may  be  requisite  for  the  introduction  of  an  Organ. 
Of  which  letter  and  petition  the  tenor  follows: 

My  LORD  Glasgow,  21st  August,  1806. 

I  take  the  liberty  of  requesting  your  lordship 
to  lay  before  the  magistrates  and  council  of  the 
city  of  Glasgow,  the  petition  herewith  transmit- 
ted by  the  congregation  of  St.  Andrew's  church. 
Anxious  as  I  am  for  the  success  of  a  request  by 
a  united  congregation,  I  am  equally  anxious  that 
our  magistrates  and  council  should  pronounce  a 
sentence  worthy  of  themselves  and  the  office  with 
which  they  are  invested.  No  law,  so  far  as  I 
have  either  read  or  heard,  has  ever  been  made 
with  regard  to  Organs.  I  hope,  therefore,  that 
the  judgment  of  the  council,  whatever  it  be,  shall 
be  expressed  in  language  that  conveys  neither 
approbation  nor  disapprobation  of  instrumental 
music  in  churches:  But  that  the  petition  shall  be 
granted  or  refused,  merely  on  the  ground  of  ex- 
pediency or  inexpediency  as  to  the  removal  of  the 
seats.  To  this  alone,  in  my  opinion,  the  juris- 
diction of  heritors  extends.  In  giving  this  opi- 
nion, I  have  no  desire  to  dictate  to  my  superiors 
what  line  of  conduct  they  ought  to  pursue,  but  to 
discover  my  wish,  that  the  decision  given  may  be 
such,  as  to  maintain  in  the  esteem  of  their  fellow- 
citizens,  of  their  country,  and  of  Europe,  that 
high  reputation  for  liberality,  combined  with 
prudence,  which  has  hitherto  distinguished  those 


who  preside  over  the  interests  of  the  city  of  Gin 
goW. — I  have  the  honour  to  remain, 

With  due  sentiments  of  respect, 
My  Lord, 
Your  lordship's  most  obedient  servant, 
(Signed)  Will.  Ritchie 


Follows  the  Petition. 

To  the  Honourable  the  Lord  Provost,  Magish 
and  Council  of  the  City  of  Glasgow. 

We,  subscribers,  anxious  for  our  own  improve- 
ment in  sacred  music,  have  long  cherished  in  pri- 
vate, what  we  now  hope  to  realize,  an  earnest 
wish  of  erecting  an  Organ  in  St.  Andrew's  church. 
This  our  wish  we  should  never  have  deemed  it 
necessary  thus  publicly  to  express,  had  we  felt 
ourselves  at  liberty,  without  permission  of  our 
patrons  and  heritors,  to  make  such  arrangements 
in  the  church,  as  the  placing  of  an  Organ  may 
require.  For  obtaining  this  permission,  we  ad- 
dress ourselves  to  you  as  our  heritors,  on  whom 
lies  the  burden  of  taking  care  that  the  sitters  shall 
not  in  any  degree  injure  the  church,  either  in  \u 
revenue  or  its  accommodation  for  hearers.  Every 
appearance  of  such  injury  we  are  determined  to 
avoid,  and  therefore  it  is  our  request,  that  the 
proposed  alterations  may  be  carried  on  under  the 
inspection  of  the  Master  of  Works,  and  of  such 
other  gentlemen  as  it  may  be  judged  expedient 
to  appoint.  The  question  as  to  the  propriety  of 
using  an  Organ  in  church,  it  becomes  us  not  to 
discuss  before  you,  either  m  magistrates  or  heri- 
tors. This  is  a  matter  of  private  judgment  mere- 
ly,  in  which  we  alone  vm\  decide  for  QUTSelves 


We  are  fully  persuaded,  that  in  the  execution  of 
our  plan,  we  violate  no  law  either  of  the  church 
or  of  the  state.  We  give  no  offence  to  the  preju- 
dice of  our  people,  for  the  congregation  are  all 
of  one  mind.  We  bring  no  new  burden  on  the 
heritors,  for  the  whole  of  the  expense  we  bind 
ourselves  to  defray.  We  prescribe  no  rule  of 
conduct  to  others.  Wre  only  adopt  what  we  think 
and  feel  to  be  for  our  own  edification.  We  en- 
croach upon  no  sacred  privilege,  no  civil  right 
of  any  man,  or  of  any  body  of  men  in  the  king- 
dom. Acting  thus  within  the  limits  of  the  law  of 
the  land,  of  the  law  of  the  church,  and  of  the  ob- 
ligations of  good  neighbourhood,  we  cannot  en- 
tertain a  doubt  that  our  scheme  shall  not  only  be 
permitted,  but  encouraged,  by  our  enlightened 
heritors,  who,  we  know,  are  ambitious  of  pro- 
moting every  rational  improvement;  who  will  ob- 
serve with  pleasure,  our  attempt  to  advance  in 
the  knowledge  and  the  practice  of  psalmody,  and 
w  ill  gladly  concur  in  the  endeavour  to  rescue  our 
national  character  from  the  reproach  of  having 
almost  entirely  neglected  the  cultivation  of  sacred 
music.  Our  heritors,  magistrates  of  one  of  the 
first  commercial  cities  of  Europe,  will  thus  give 
new  evidence  to  mankind  that  the  genius  of  com- 
merce is  not  the  contracted  spirit  of  hostility  to 
the  liberal  arts,  but  the  enlivening  sun  of  science, 
dispelling  in  its  progress  the  gloomy  fogs  of 
prejudice,  that  have  too  long  benumbed  the  ener- 
gies, and  untuned  the  feelings  Gf  our  country. 

Glasgow  has  the  honour  of  having  first  made 
the  public  proposal  of  introducing  into  one  of  its 
churches  the  most  perfect  of  musical  instruments, 
and  of  employing  it  for  the  generous  purpose  of 
inning  the  public  voice  for  the  exercise  of  praise. 


And  the  present  Lord  Provost,  and  magistrates 
and  council,  will,  we  doubt  not,  eagerly  embrace 
the  opportunity  of  accomplishing  a  measure  which 
will  give  additional  lustre  to  their  names,  and  ren- 
der the  period  of  their  administration  the  open- 
ing of  a  new  era  in  the  annals  of  our  national 
advancement. 

May  it  therefore  please  our  patrons  and  heri- 
tors, to  grant  us  liberty  to  make  such  alter- 
ations in  the  seats  behind  the  pulpit  in  St. 
Andrew's  church,  as  may  be  requisite  for 
carrying  into  execution  our  design.  There 
exists  not,  we  believe,  in  any  parish,  even  in 
the  remotest  and  least  cultivated  part  of  the 
kingdom,  a  body  of  heritors,  who  would  not 
feel  at  least  some  reluctance  to  refuse  the 
petition  of  a  united  people,  for  so  very  small 
a  favour,  the  granting  of  which  involves  not 
any  expense,  and  hurts  not  the  claims  of  any 
human  being.  Your  complying  with  our 
earnest  request  will  form  a  new  bond  of  at- 
tachment between  our  magistrates  and  our 
congregation,  while  it  will  unite  the  tie  of 
private  gratitude  to  the  sentiments  of  public 
veneration,  with  which  we  implore  upon 
their  heads  the  blessing  of  Almighty  God, 
who  hath  formed  the  ear  for  the  delights  of 
harmony,  and  whom  we  are  bound  to  serve 
by  the  culture  of  every  faculty  which  it  hath 
pleased  him  in  his  goodness  to  bestow. 

Subscribed  by  a  great  number  of  gentlemen 
2vho  possess  seats  in  St,  Andrews  church. 

Which  letter  and  petition  having  been  read, 
the  Lord  Provost  stated,  that  before  he  submitted 
this  matter  to  the  council,  he  and  the  other  I 


gistrates  had  thought  it  right  to  have  the  opinion 
of  the  legal  advisers  of  the  city;  and  that  in  conse- 
quence of  the  request  of  the  magistrates,  he  re- 
ceived from  the  first  town-clerk  an  official  letter  on 
the  subject.  Which  letter  having  been  also  read, 
and  the  said  petition  and  letter  having  been  de- 
liberately considered,  the  magistrates  and  council 
approve  of  the  opinion  given  by  Mr.  Reddie; 
resolve  to  act  in  the  manner  therein  suggested, 
with  regard  to  the  request  contained  in  the  said 
petition,  and  direct  an  extract  of  this  act  of 
council,  with  a  copy  of  the  said  letter,  to  be 
transmitted  to  the  Rev.  Dr.  Ritchie,  and  to  the 
gentlemen  who  subscribe  the  petition,  as  the  an- 
swer of  the  magistrates  and  council  to  the  said 
application.  Of  which  letter  from  Mr.  Reddie 
the  tenor  follows: — 

(copy.) 

Mr.  Reddle's  Letter. 

t.  «-     -J  Glasgow,  6th  September,  1806. 

I  have  perused,  and  deliberately  considered, 
the  petition  of  a  number  of  most  respectable  in- 
habitants, who  possess  seats  in  St.  Andrew's 
church,  requesting  the  permission  of  the  magis- 
trates and  council  to  introduce  an  Organ  into 
that  church.  I  have  also  perused  the  letter  of 
the  Rev.  Dr.  Ritchie,  transmitted  to  your  lord- 
ship along  with  the  petition.  Agreeably  to  the 
direction  of  your  lordship,  and  the  other  magis- 
trates, I  shall  now,  as  briefly  as  I  can,  state  what 
occurs  to  me  on  this  subject.  And  I  have  no 
doubt,  whatever  resolution  the  magistrates  and 
council  may  ultimately  adopt,  that  they  will  be 
guided  by  views,  at  once  liberal  and  prudent,  and 


8 

that  the  grounds  on  which  they  proceed,  will  bo 
such,  as  to  command  the  respect  of  their  fellow- 
citizens,  and  of  their  country. 

Were  I  called  upon  to  express  my  own  indivi- 
dual opinion  and  feelings,  I  should,  perhaps,  laj 
claim  to  the  honour  of  participating  in  the  senti- 
ments and  wishes  of  the  enlightened  congregation 
of  St.  Andrew's  church.  But  on  this  subject,  my 
individual  opinion  is  a  matter  of  no  importance 
whatever.  It  is  my  opinion,  as  one  of  the  legal 
assessors  of  the  city  of  Glasgow,  that  your  lord- 
ship and  the  other  magistrates  require. 

In  the  petition,  and  in  Dr.  Ritchie's  letter,  it 
seems  to  be  hinted,  that  the  magistrates  and 
council  have  the  power  of  granting,  or  refusing, 
the  present  application,  u  merely  on  the  ground 
"  of  expediency  or  inexpediency,  as  to  the  re- 
"  moval  of  the  seats"  in  the  church.  With  me, 
this  opinion  has  no  weight;  because  1  do  not  con- 
ceive it  to  be  warranted  by  the  law  of  the  land. 

Of  the  present  application,  the  (Magistrates  and 
council  have  a  right  to  judge,  in  two  characters, 
as  representative  heritors,  and  as  civil  magis- 
trates.— As  heritors,  they  have  a  legal  right  to 
insist,  that  their  patrimonial  interests  shall  not  be 
impaired  by  the  proposed  measure.  These  pa- 
trimonial interests  the  gentlemen  of  the  in 
tracy  and  council  might,  perhaps,  on  such  an  oc- 
casion, be  disposed  to  waive,  were  they  heritor-  in 
their  own  personal  right.  But  the  members  of 
the  magistracy  and  council  are  not  heritors  in 
their  own  right.  They "are  heritors  merely,  as 
representing  the  community  of  Glasgow.  And  to 
the  interests  of  that  community,  they  are  hound. 
on  this,  as  on  all  other  occasions,  to  attend. 
Whatever  resolution,  therefore,  may  be  ultimate- 


ly  adopted,  it  will  be  necessary,  that  due  precau- 
tions be  taken,  to  secure  effectually  the  pecuniary 
interests  of  the  community. 

But  there  is  another,  and  a  more  important 
character,  in  which  your  lordship,  and  the  other 
gentlemen  of  the  magistracy,  are  called  upon  to 
judge  of  the  present  application;  I  mean,  as  civil 
magistrates. 

That  there  is  any  express  act  of  the  legislature, 
prohibiting  the  use  of  Organs  in  our  established 
churches,  I  am  not  aware.  But  that  the  intro- 
duction of  Organs  into  our  churches,  would  be  a 
material  alteration,  and  innovation  in  our  exter- 
nal mode  of  worship,  there  cannot  be  a  doubt. — 
The  argument,  which  would  identify  an  Organ 
with  a  pitchpipe,  does  not  merit  a  serious  answer. 

Whether  the  use  of  Organs  in  our  established 
churches,  would  be  an  expedient,  or  an  inexpe- 
dient measure,  in  a  religious  and  ecclesiastical 
view,  it  is  unnecessary  here  to  inquire;  because 
your  lordship  and  the  other  magistrates  are  not 
an  ecclesiastical  judicature,  and  have  no  right  to 
take  cognizance  of  the  matter  in  that  character. 
But,  as  civil  magistrates,  you  are  legally  bound 
to  maintain  our  constitution,  in  church  and  state, 
IB  its  present  condition;  and  by  express  statute, 
you  are  bound  "  to  take  order,  that  unity  and 
;i  peace  be  preserved  in  the  church." — That  there 
is  great  danger  of  the  introduction  of  Organs  dis- 
turbing the  peace,  and  interrupting  the  harmony 
of  the  Church  of  Scotland,  I  should  be  sorry  to 
suppose.  At  the  same  time,  such  an  event  is  pos- 
sible. Whether  for  the  auricular  gratification  of 
one  congregation,  ground  of  offence  should  be 
afforded  to  other  congregations,  is  a  matter  that 
•  ires  serious  thought.    Some  respect  is  due  b\ 


10 

the  civil  magistrate,  even  to   what  many  indivi- 
duals may  be  disposed  to  term,  the  prejudio 
their  weaker  brethren.    And  at  all  events,  if  an) 

innovation  in  our  external  mode  of  worship  be 
expedient  and  salutary,  the  reform,  or  improve- 
ment, ought  to  originate  with  the  ecclesiastical 
branch  of  the  government,  with  the  constitutional 
guardians  of  our  conduct,  and  our  welfare,  in 
such  matters.  When  the  use  of  Organs  in  our 
established  churches  has  been  sanctioned  by  our 
ecclesiastical  legislature,  then  it  will  be  the  duty 
of  your  lordship  and  the  other  maui-trates,  not 
merely  to  permit  the  use  of  these  musical  instru- 
ments, but  to  protect  in  that  use,  those  congre- 
gations, who  may  conceive  such  instruments  to 
minister  to  their  edification.  Till  the  ecclesiasti- 
cal branch  of  the  constitution  have  sanctioned  the 
use  of  Organs  in  our  established  churches,  I  do 
not  see  that  the  magistrates  and  council  can,  with 
any  propriety,  directly  or  indirectly,  approve  of 
such  an  ecclesiastical  innovation. 

I  have  been  told,  that  the  only  way  in  which 
this  matter  can  be  brought  before  our  ecclesiasti- 
cal judicatures,  is  by  a  complaint  and  interdict. 
— I  pretend  not  to  be  conversant  with  the  forms 
of  our  church  courts.  But,  I  am  much  mistaken 
indeed,  if  our  establishment  be  so  grossly  defec- 
tive, as  not  to  afford  some  way  sufficiently  formal, 
of  obtaining  the  permission,  or  sanction,  of  our 
ecclesiastical  legislature,  for  what  may  be  an  ex- 
pedient alteration  in  our  mode  of  worship. 

From  the  Language  of  the  petition,  it  seems  to 
be  supposed,  that  were  not  the  magistrates  and 
council  heritors  of  St.  Andrew's  church,  the  sub- 
scribers might,  of  their  own  authority  solely,  in- 
troduce an  Organ.     In  (his  opinion  1  cannot 


11 

incide.  To  the  happiness  and  glory  of  this  na- 
tion, every  man  may  worship  God  in  the  manner 
he  thinks  fit.  But  while  unlimited  toleration  pre- 
vails IB  this  country,  we  have  at  the  same  time 
an  ecclesiastical  establishment,  recognized  by 
law.  Under  that  establishment,  a  certain  mode 
of  worship  is,  and  has  been  for  ages,  observed. 
And  to  that  mode  of  worship,  until  altered  by 
constitutional  authority,  whatever  Dissenters  may 
do,  the  members  of  the  Establishment  are  bound 
to  conform. 

In  former  times,  the  inhabitants  of  Glasgow 
stood  forward,  the  steady  supporters  of  civil  and 
religions  freedom.  And  although  firmly  attached 
to  the  simple  and  unadorned  form  of  worship, 
handed  down  to  them  by  their  forefathers,  I  am 
convinced  the  gentlemen  who  at  present  com- 
pose the  magistracy  and  council,  are,  at  least,  as 
anxious  as  any  of  their  predecessors  ever  were, 
to  promote  every  rational  and  liberal  improve- 
ment. But  zeal  for  improvement,  ought  to  be 
tempered  with  prudence.  And  I  own,  I  should  be 
sorry  indeed,  were  the  magistrates  and  council  of 
Glasgow  to  commit  themselves  so  far,  as  to  sanc- 
tion, authorize,  or  approve,  in  any  capacity,  di- 
rectly or  indirectly,  expressly  or  tacitly,  what,  it 
is  possible,  the  General  Assembly  of  the  Church 
of  Scotland,  in  the  exercise  of  its  constitutional 
functions,  may  afterwards  disapprove  and  pro- 
hibit. 

Lpon  the  whole,  then,  my  opinion  is,  First, 
That  the  magistrates  and  council,  as  representa- 
tive heritors,  are  bound  to  take  such  measures,  as 
may  prevent  the  funds  of  the  community  from 
sustaining  any  injury  by  the  introduction  of  the 
proposed  Organ ;  and,  Secondly,  That  the  ma- 


12 

gislrates  and  council  ought  to  recommend  ii  tti 
the  gentlemen  subscribers,  and  to  the  able  and 
learned  pastor  of  that  most  respectable  congrega- 
tion, before  proceeding  farther,  to  apply  for  the 
permission  and  sanction  of  the  ecclesiastical 
branch  of  our  constitution.  If  the  measure  be 
expedient  and  salutary,  there  will  surely  be  the 
less  difficulty  in  obtaining  that  sanction.  And 
whatever  may  be  the  result,  the  measure  will  be 
fully  and  fairly  discussed  by  that  deliberative  as- 
sembly, whose  province  it  is  to  take  cognizance 
of  such  matters. 

I  have  to  apologize  for  trespassing  so  much  on 
the  time  of  your  lordship.  And  I  have  the  honour 
to  be,  with  much  respect  and  esteem, 
My  Lord, 
Your  lordship's  faithful  servant, 
(Signed)  James  Reddie. 


(copy.) 
First  Letter  the  Lord  Provost  to  Dr.  Ritchie. 

■j-v  o  Glasgow,  22d  August,  1807. 

LJEAR  oIR, 

In  a  conversation  which  took  place  in  a  com- 
pany where  I  was  yesterday,  it  was  mentioned 
by  a  member  of  your  congregation,  that  it  was 
intended  to  make  use  of  the  Organ  at  present  in 
St.  Andrew's  church  of  this  city  during  divine 
service  to-morrow,  or  on  some  Sunday  soon.  1 
beg  to  know  if  such  really  is  your  intention,  be- 
cause, if  bo,  I  shall  consider  it  my  duty  to  enter 
i  solemn  protest  against  you  for  all  damages 
which  may  be  the  consequence. — I  am.  fee. 

James  -Mackenzie. 


13 

(copy.) 

Letter  from  Dr.  Ritchie  to  the  Lord  Provost. 

My  Lord, 

1  have  this  moment  had  the  honour  of  receiv- 
ing your  lordship's  letter,  relative  to  what  you 
have  heard  about  the  intention  expressed  by  the 
congregation  of  St.  Andrew's  church,  to  employ 
an  Organ  in  public  worship.  I  shall  embrace 
the  first  possible  opportunity  of  laying  the  Lord 
Provost's  letter  before  the  committee  of  that  con- 
gregation, to  whom  the  business  of  the  Organ  has 
been  committed,  that  they  ma}'  know  at  what  risk 
such  an  attempt  as  that  which  they  have  in  view 
must  be  made.  They  will,  as  becomes  them,  pay 
all  due  deference  to  your  lordship's  declaration." 
I  have  the  honour  to  remain,  he. 

(Signed)  Will.  Ritchie. 

Rimer-Street,      > 

22d  August,  1807.  $ 


(copy.) 
Second  Letter  the  Lord  Provost  to  Dr.  Ritchie. 

Rev.  Sir  Glasgow,  26th  August,  1S07. 

After  the  answer  returned  by  the  magistrates 
and  council  of  this  city  in  the  month  of  September 


*  The  public  may  judjre  of  the  deference  Dr.  Ritchie  paid  to 
the  Lord  Provost's  declaration,  when  they  are  informed,  that 
the  Organ  was  used  in  St.  Andrew's  church,  in  the  public  wor- 
ship of  God,  the  very  next  day  after  he  had  received  that  letter. 
Indeed,  it  appears  from  Dr.  Ritchie's  o\\  n  account,  that  he  did 
not  lay  that  letter  before  his  musical  committee  till  the  26th. 


14 

last,  to  the  application  of  the  minister  and  van 

members  of  the  congregation  of  St.  Andrew's 
church,  for  permission  to  introduce  an  Organ,  it 
was  not  expected  that  you  or  any  of  the  members 
of  that  congregation  would  have  placed  an  Organ 
in  that  church,  or  would  have  authorized  per- 
formance on  such  a  musical  instrument  on  Sun- 
day, and  at  the  time  of  divine  service,  without 
having  previously  obtained  the  sanction  of  our 
ecclesiastical  legislature  for  such  a  proceeding. 

That  an  Organ  has  lately  been  introduced  into 
St.  Andrew's  church,  and  was  used  on  Sunday 
last,  while  the  congregation  were  engaged  in  di- 
vine service,  I  have  received  information  from 
different  quarters;  and  I  have  not  yet  learned  thai 
the  ecclesiastical  branch  of  our  constitution  has, 
in  any  shape,  approved  or  sanctioned  so  material 
an  innovation  in  our  external  form  of  worship. 

Whether  such  an  innovation  be  an  improve- 
ment,  or  the  reverse,  it  is  not  the  province  of  the 
magistrates  and  council  to  inquire,  or  to  deter- 
mine. And  I  conceive  I  shall  discharge  the  le- 
gal duty  incumbent  on  the  civil  magistrate,  in  a 
religious  or  ecclesiastical  point  of  view,  by  mere!  \ 
ng  intimation  of  the  event  to  the  Rev.  Pres- 
bytery within  whose  bounds  this  city  is  situated. 

But  while  the  magistrates  and  council  thus 
leave  entirely  to  the  ecclesiastical  judicatories, 
whose  province  it  is  to  take  cognizance  of  such 
matters,  the  superintendence  and  regulation  of 
our  external  form  of  worship.  I  think  it  necessarj 
on  the  part  of  the  patrons  of  St.  Andrew's  church, 
and  of  the  heritors  of  the  parish,  as  notified  in 
letter  of  Saturday,  thus  formally  to  protest, 
and  intimate  to  you  as  minister,  and  through 
vour  medium  to  the  other  members  of  your  kirk 


15 

session,  and  to  the  individuals  of  whom  the  con- 
gregation is  composed,  that,  in  the  event  of  the 
measure  which  you  have  thought  fit  to  adopt, 
without  the  approbation  of  the  patrons  and  he- 
ritors, proving  detrimental  in  any  respect  to  the 
pecuniary  interests  of  the  city  and  community  of 
Glasgow,  the  patrons  and  heritors  hold  you  and 
the  other  members  of  your  kirk-session  and  con- 
gregation as  legally  liable  for  the  consequences, 
whatever  they  may  be. 

Farther,  on  the  part  of  the  magistrates  of  this 
city,  I  feel  myself  called  upon  to  give  you  this 
formal  intimation,  that  although  determined  as  in 
duty  bound,  at  all  times  to  preserve  peace  and 
good  order  among  the  inhabitants,  the  magis- 
trates hold  you  and  the  other  members  of  the 
kirk-session,  and  congregation  of  St.  Andrew's 
church,  as  responsible  for  the  consequences  of 
any  breach  of  the  peace  which  may  possibly  be 
occasioned  by  the  innovation  you  have  attempted 
to  introduce. — I  am,  &x. 

(Signed)  James  Mackenzie. 

To  the  Rev.  Dr.  Ritchie. 


Second  Letter  to  the  Presbytery. 

-p      „    q  Glasgow,  2d  September,  1807. 

Since  my  letter  of  the  26th  ult.  was  transmitted 
to  you,  I  think  it  right  to  inform  you  that  a  deputa- 
tion from  the  St.  Andrew's  congregation  waited 
upon  me  on  Saturday  last,*  and  intimated  ver- 
bally, that  they  had  come  to  the  determination  of 

v  The  29th  of  August 


16 

giving  up  the  use  of  an  Organ  for  the  present,  ii 

I  would  withdraw  the  communication  which  1  had 
made  to  the  Presbytery.  To  this  intimation  I 
gave  no  immediate  answer,  but  having  occasion 
to  hold  a  meeting  of  the  magistrates  and  council 
yesterday,  on  other  business,  I  laid  before  them 
the  whole  of  my  correspondence  about  the  Organ; 
they  unanimously  approved  of  all  that  I  had  done, 
and  agreed  that  the  matter  should  now  rest  with 
the  reverend  Presbytery. — I  have  the  honour  to 
be,  Rev.  Sir, 

Your  most  obedient  servant, 
(Signed)  James  Mackenzie. 

Lord  Provost. 
Tbe  Rev.  Moderator  of  the  Presbytery  of  Glasgow 


Minutes  of  Presbytery. 

September  2d,  1807. 

The  Presbytery  unanimously  appoint  the  mo- 
derator to  write  a  respectful  letter  of  thanks  to 
the  Lord  Provost,  acknowledging  his  communi- 
cation, and  informing  him,  that  the  same  is  re- 
corded, and  that  the  Presbytery  will  take  the  case 
referred  to,  into  their  serious  consideration.  Dr. 
Ritchie  requested  the  Presbytery  to  delay  proce- 
dure in  this  cause  till  next  ordinary  meeting,  so- 
lemnly promising,  that  the  Organ  should  not 
again  be  used,  without  the  authority  of  the 
church.  The  Presbytery  unanimously  granted 
said  request. 


17 


October  7tb,  1807. 


Mr.  Burns,  the  moderator  of  last  meeting,  pro 
tempore,  reported,  that  he  wrote  a  letter  of  thanks 
to  the  Lord  Provost  of  Glasgow,  agreeably  to 
the  Presbytery's  appointment. 

The  Presbytery  having  resumed  consideration 
of  the  cause  respecting  the  introduction  of  the 
Organ  into  St.  Andrew's  church — Dr.  Ritchie 
was  heard  on  the  subject,  and  judicially  declared, 
in  terms  of  last  minute,  viz.  That  he  would  not 
again  use  an  Organ  in  the  public  worship  of  God, 
without  the  authority  of  the  church. 

The  Presbytery  having  deliberated  on  this 
cause  at  great  length,  and  maturely  considered 
the  same,  a  motion  was  made  and  seconded,  viz. 
That  the  Presbytery  are  of  opinion,  that  the  use 
of  Organs  in  the  public  worship  of  God  is  con- 
trary to  the  law  of  the  land,  and  to  the  law  and 
constitution  of  our  established  church,  and  there- 
fore prohibit  it  in  all  the  churches  and  chapels 
within  their  bounds:  And  with  respect  to  Dr. 
Ritchie's  conduct  in  this  matter,  they  are  satis- 
fied with  his  declaration. 

On  the  other  hand,  it  was  moved  and  seconded, 
That  in  consequence  of  Dr.  Ritchie's  judicial  de- 
claration, the  Presbytery  should  find  it  unneces- 
sary to  proceed  further  in  this  business,  declaring, 
at  the  same  time,  their  judgment,  that  the  intro- 
duction of  an  Organ  into  public  worship  is  inex- 
pedient, and  unauthorised  in  our  church. 

The  state  of  the  vote  being  first  or  second  mo~ 
don,  and  Dr.  Ritchie  having  desired  it  to  be 
marked  that  he  declined  voting — The  roll  was 
called,  and  the  votes  marked,  when  it  carried. 

First  motion. Wherefore,  the  Presbvterv  did. 

2* 


18 

and  hereby  do,  in  terms  of  the  first  motion,  de- 
clare that  the  use  of  Organs  in  the  public  wor- 
ship of  God  is  contrary  to  the  law  of  the  land, 
and  to  the  law  and  constitution  of  our  established 
church;  and  therefore  the  Presbytery  did,  and 
hereby  do,  prohibit  the  use  of  Organs  in  all  the 
churches  and  chapels  within  their  bounds:  And 
with  respect  to  Dr.  Ritchie's  conduct  in  this  mat- 
ter, they  are  satisfied  with  his  declaration. 

From  which  judgment,  Principal  Taylor,  in 
his  own  name,  and  in  the  name  of  all  those  who 
should  adhere  to  him,  dissented,  and  promised  to 
give  in  his  reasons  in  due  time,  to  which  dissent 
adhered  Dr.  Ranken  and  Dr.  M'Gill,  Mr.  David- 
son and  Mr.  Jack,  and  took  instruments  in  the 
clerk's  hands. 


November  4th,  1807. 

The  clerk  reported,  that  there  was  lodged  with 
him,  in  due  time,  reasons  of  dissent  against  the 
judgment  of  the  Presbytery  at  last  meeting,  which 
reasons  were  read.     The  tenor  wherof  follows: 

Glasgow,  13th  October,  1607. 

Reasons  of  Dissent  from  a  Judgment  of  the 
Presbytery  of  Glasgow,  October^Tth,  1S07,  in 
which  they  declare,  "  That  the  use  of  Organs 
"  in  the  public  worship  of  God  is  contrary  to 
"  the  law  of  the  land,  and  to  the  law  and  con- 
"  siitution  of  the  established  chgreh,"  ccc.  &c. 

1.  Because  this  sentence  gives  a  decision  upon 
a  general  question  which  was  not  properly  under 
tlic  consideration  of  the  Presbytery,  The  ques- 
tion was  not  respecting  the  competency  of  the 


19 

Church  of  Scotland  to  judge  in  the  case  of  instru- 
mental  music,  nor  even  respecting  the  general 
point  of  its  lawfulness  and  utility,  but  regarded 
an  individual  case  brought  before  them,  which 
was  attended  with  peculiar  circumstances,  and  to 
which  the  decision  should  have  been  confined. 
Positive  decisions,  on  general  questions,  concern- 
ing which  the  church  has  not  given  an  opinion, 
the  dissenters  conceive  should  be  seldom  at- 
tempted by  an  inferior  court;  but  still  less,  when 
such  general  questions  are  not  directly  or  neces- 
sarily brought  under  their  consideration. 

2.  There  were  peculiar  reasons  in  this  case, 
which  should  have  rendered  the  Presbytery  sa- 
tisfied with  giving  their  judgment  on  it  alone. 
The  circumstances  of  the  case,  as  brought  before 
the  Presbytery,  were  of  a  peculiar  nature,  and 
formed  sufficient  ground  for  a  determination  on 
its  own  merits.  Any  member  could  not  be  sup- 
posed to  have  formed  a  positive  judgment  on  the 
general  question,  concerning  which  he  knew  not 
that  he  was  to  give  an  opinion,  and  the  general 
purposes  of  peace  and  order  would  have  been  suf- 
ficiently and  better  secured,  by  agreeing  to  re- 
ceive  the  judicial  declaration  of  the  Minister  con- 
cerned,  that  the  Organ  should  not  be  again  used 
without  the  authority  of  the  church,  and  finding, 
as  the  Presbytery  would  unanimously  have  done, 
that  its  introduction  was  inexpedient  and  unau- 
thorised. 

3.  But  these  reasons  would  not  have  induced 
the  dissentients  to  have  entered  their  dissent,  nor 
even  perhaps  to  have  divided  the  Presbytery  on 
the  subject,  could  they  have  acquiesced  in  the 
justice  and  truth  of  the  declaration  which  the 
Presbytery  have   emitted.     They  are   very  far 


20 

from  meaning  to  impute  blame  to  their  brethren, 
for  whom  they  have  the  greatest  respect  and  af- 
fection, they  mean  merely  to  express  that  diffe- 
rence of  opinion  which  they  feel  themselves 
obliged  to  entertain  upon  the  subject.  They 
observe,  therefore,  as  their  last  and  principal 
reason  of  dissent,  That  the  opinion  expressed  by 
the  Presbytery,  not  only  proceeds  farther  than 
the  case  required,  but  asserts  as  facts,  concerning 
the  law  of  the  land,  and  the  constitution  of  the 
church,  what  the  dissenters  cannot  perceive,  and 
dare  not,  consistently  with  a  good  conscience,  af- 
firm. No  law  of  the  church,  nor  of  the  land,  has 
been  passed  concerning  instrumental  music:  and 
they  know  of  no  law  existing,  to  which  they  can 
go  the  length  of  pronouncing  that  it  is  contrary. 
The  dissentients  allow,  that  it  is  unauthorised, 
and  they  do  not  assert  that  authority  for  it  should 
be  given;  but  neither,  on  the  other  hand,  can 
they  assert  that  any  law  has  yet  determined  the 
question.  The  question  concerning  the  lawful- 
ness, utility,  or  expediency  of  instrumental  music 
in  public  worship,  is  open  for  the  Church  of  Scot- 
land to  consider  and  determine.  This  being  their 
opinion,  they  could  still  less  proceed  the  length 
of  declaring  that  it  is  contrary  to  the  law  of  the 
land,  and  the  very  constitution  of  the  church  ; 
and,  by  consequence,  that  it  is  not  in  the  power 
of  the  Church  of  Scotland,  even  if  willing,  t<>  take 

the  subject  under  their  consideration.  The  ques- 
tion, the  dissentients  consider  to  he  a  question  of 
utility  and  expedience)  which  the  church  has  it  in 
its  power  at  any  time  to  consider  and  determine; 

nor  do  they  know  an\  law  of  the  land,  or  princi- 
ple of  the  constitution,  which  should  present  die 

church   from  giving  any  determination   it    .-hall. 


21 

in  its  wisdom,  judge  right.  The  Act  of  Security, 
the  dissentients  conceive,  has  been  interpreted  by 
the  Presbytery  with  a  strictness  in  this  instance, 
which  has  never  been  applied  to  other  subjects. 
And  though  they  readily  admit  that  the  Barrier 
Act  points  out  the  mode,  which,  in  the  case  of 
new  practices  and  laws,  must  be  followed,  yet 
they  conceive  that  the  very  design  of  the  act,  in 
pointing  out  the  mode  which  is  to  be  pursued, 
plainly  shows  that  the  church  has  the  power  of  de- 
ciding upon  new  propositions  or  overtures,  which 
interfere  not  with  those  general  and  leading  prin- 
ciples on  which  its  constitution  is  founded, 

(Signed)       William  Taylor. 

Alexander  Ranken. 
David  Davidson. 
Stevenson  Macgill. 

Dr.  Porteous,  Dr.  Balfour,  Mr.  Lapslie,  and 
Mr.  M'Lean,  are  appointed  a  committee  to  an- 
swer said  Reasons  of  Dissent, 


December  2d,  1807. 

The  committee  appointed  to  draw  up  answers 
to  the  Reasons  of  Dissent  against  the  judgment 
of  the  Presbytery  on  the  7th  of  October  last,  re- 
specting the  Organ,  gave  in  said  answers,  which 
were  read. — The  Presbytery  approve  of  said 
answers,  and  appoint  the  same  to  be  recorded. 
The  tenor  whereof  follows.  Reserving  it  to  Dr. 
Ritchie,  Dr.  Taylor,  jun.  and  Dr.  Lockhart,  to 
submit  to  the  next  Presbytery  such  explanations 
as  they  shall  think  proper. 


22 

The  committee  appointed  to  prepare  answ< 
Reasons  of  Dissent  from  a  judgment  of  the 
Presbyter)  of  Glasgow;  7th  October,  1S07,  in 
which  they  declare,  "  That  the  use  of  Organs 
"  in  the  public  workup  of  God,  is  contrary  to 
"  the  law  of  the  land,  and  to  the  law  and  con- 
"  stitution  of  the  established  church,"  be. 
beg  leave  to  submit  the  following  to  the  reve- 
rend Presbytery. 

The  committee  enter  on  this  business  with  deep 
concern.  But  when  reasons  of  dissent  are  re- 
corded^ an  appeal  is  made  to  posterity,  which 
renders  the  recording  of  answers  indispensably 
necessary.  Unfortunately,  in  these  reasons,  the 
Presbyter}'  is  not  only  charged  with  having  acted 
improperly \  but  with  having  violated  truth  and 
justice.  To  repel  so  serious  charges,  it  seems 
unavoidable  for  the  Presbytery  to  furnish  poste- 
rity with  an  account  of  their  situation,  and  of  the 
various  extraordinary  circumstances  in  which 
they  are  called  to  act.  Should  this  give  rise  to 
strictures  which  seem  severe,  the  responsibility 
must  rest  with  those  who  have  recorded  reasons 
of  dissent,  and  made  it  necessary  for  the  Pres- 
bytery to  vindicate  themselves,  as  well  as  to  de- 
fend the  purity  and  uniformity  of  the  national 
worship. 

It  is  considerably  more  than  two  years  since 
the  public  mind  was  agitated  by  the  proposal  of 
introducing  aD  Organ  into  St.  Andrew's  church. 

During  this  long  period,  the  Presbytery  waited 
with  patience,  in  the  hope,  thai  lime  and  good 
sense  would  dispose  the  authors  and  abettors  of' 
this  proposal,  to  listen  to  wiser  counsels. 
About  the  end  of  August  last,  a  communica- 


23 

lion  was  made  to  the  Presbytery  by  the  Lord 
Provost,  with  the  approbation  of  the  city  coun- 
cil, containing  extracts,  letters,  and  copies  of  let- 
ters, which,  having  been  read  by  the  Presbytery, 
they  ordered  a  respectful  letter  of  thanks  to  be 
written  by  the  moderator,  and  sent  10  the  Lord 
Provost,  acknowledging  the  receipt  of  these  pa- 
pers. 

From  this  communication,  it  appeared  that  an 
Organ  had  been  introduced  into  St.  Andi 
church,  and  employed  on  the  Sabbath,  in  time 
of  divine  service.  St.  Andrew's  church  belongs 
to  the  National  Establishment,  and  is  under  the 
jurisdiction  of  the  Presbytery  of  Glasgow.  It 
was  certainly  known,  that  Organs  have  never 
been  used  in  the  Presbyterian  Church  of  Scot- 
land,— and  that  no  minister  of  that  church  had 
ever  presumed,  before  this,  to  introduce  theme 
It  was  certainly  known  that  the  people  of  Scot- 
land are  not  given  to  change — especially  in  mat- 
ters connected  with  religion.  And  it  might  have 
been  known,  that  Glasgow  is  not  the  place,  and 
the  present  is  not  the  time,  for  a  business  of  this 
sort. 

Without  consulting  the  Presbytery,  or  seeming 
to  think  the}'  had  any  concern  in  the  matter, 
some  persons,  describing  themselves  as  the  con- 
gregation of  St.  Andrew's  church,  sent  a  petition 
to  the  honourable  magistrates  and  city  council, 
containing  a  proposal  to  have  an  Organ  intro- 
duced under  their  patronage,  or  with  their  con- 
sent and  approbation. 

This  petition  was  accompanied  by  a  letter,  no 
less  extraordinary  than  the  petition  itself. 

Before  the  city  council  gave  any  deliverance, 
they  consulted    their   legal   assessor,    who  gave 


them  a  written  opinion,  which  does  him  much 

honour.  This  opinion  the  council  adopted,  and 
accordingly  refused  "  to  sanction,  authorize,  or 

u  approve  in  any  capacity,  directly  or  indirectly. 
"  expressly  or  tacitly.''  the  introduction  of  an 
Organ  into  St.  Andrew's  church. 

The  applicants  were  certainly  of  opinion  that 
the  city  council  had  some  right,  or  power,  which 
they  wished  to  be  exercised  in  favour  of  an  Or- 
gan: and  yet  the  refusal  of  their  request  did  not 
hinder  an  Organ  from  being  introduced  into  St. 
Andrew's  church.  It  may  therefore  be  doubled. 
whether  greater  respect  has  been  shown  to  the 
Presbytery  in  not  consulting  them  at  all,  or  to 
the  city  council,  in  setting  at  nought  their  opi- 
nion, after  having  asked  and  obtained  it. 

Some  time  afterwards,  the  Lord  Provost  re- 
ceived information  that  an  Organ  was  to  be  em- 
ployed in  St.  Andrew's  church,  on  the  Sabbath, 
being  the  day  immediately  following,  in  time  of 
divine  service.  It  is  easy  to  conceive  his 
as  a  chief  magistrate,  when  the  highest  authority 
in  the  city,  and  the  respectability  of  those  in 
power,  was  thus  treated;  and  that  too  in  the  sight 
of  the  astonished  citizens,  who  have  been  taught, 
and  are  accustomed,  to  reverence  and  honour 
magistrates. 

Under  these  feelings,  he  wrote  the  letter  of  the 
J2d  August  last     Of  the  same  (late,  he  received 

an  answer,  Very  decent  and  proper  in  itself;    but, 

when  it  i>  connected  with  the  operations  of  the 

following  day,  we  are  at  a  los>  what  to  think  of 

it.     The  fait  i<,  however,  that  an  Organ  wa>,  on 

die  following  day,  employed  in  St.  Andrew's 
church,  in  time  of  divine  service. 

\  measure  of  this  kind  could  not  fail  to  strike 


the  minds  of  the  people.  They  saw  the  consti- 
tuted authorities  of  the  city  trampled  upon — the 
order  of  the  church  deranged — the  peace  of  the 
city  disturbed — contention  and  its  ordinary  com- 
panions let  loose,  and  they  could  perceive  no 
motive  for  all  this,  but  such  as  they  are  unwilling 
to  describe. 

The  immediate  consequences  of  this  explosion, 
were,  the  communication  of  the  whole  transac- 
tions by  the  Lord  Provost  to  the  Presbytery,  and 
the  unanimous  approbation  of  the  Lord  Pro- 
vost's conduct,  in  a  recorded  act  of  the  city 
council. 

[Sej?t.  2d,  ISO?.]  In  this  state,  the  business 
came  before  the  Presbytery;  and  let  posterity 
judge,  whether  the  Presbytery  have  not  all  along 
treated  their  brother,  who  was  chiefly  concerned, 
with  greater  respect  and  tenderness  than  they 
have  received  from  the  dissentients. 

It  was  first  proposed  to  delay  considering,  and 
even  recording  any  part  of  the  communication, 
till  the  next  ordinary  meeting  of  Presbytery. 
This  proposal  was  frustrated  by  Dr.  Ritchie's 
demanding  extracts;  and  saying,  in  a  short 
speech,  that  he  considered  it  as  his  right  and 
duty  to  do  what  he  had  done.  It  was  impossible 
for  the  Presbytery  any  longer  to  delay  recording 
the  communication  from  the  Lord  Provost.  But 
they  did  delay  all  further  proceedings,  except  or- 
dering the  letter  of  thanks;  and  it  ought  to  be 
remembered,  that  Dr.  Ritchie  either  dictated  or 
approved  every  clause  in  the  sentence  pro- 
nounced by  the  Presbyter}'  of  this  date. 

An  interval  of  a  month  was  thus  afforded  for 
preparing  such  explanations,  with  respect  both  to 
the  magistrates  and  the  church,  as  would  have 
3 


26 

enabled  the  Presbytery  to  send  a  suitable  and 
decisive  answer  to  the  Lord  Provost's  letters. 

[Oct.  1th,  1S07.]  The  Presbytery  met,  and 
were  disappointed  in  all  their  expectations.     Dr. 

Ritchie  said  nothing  more  than  he  had  said  at 
the  former  meeting,  namely,  That  he  would  not 
again  use  an  Organ  without  the  authority  of  the 
church.  The  Presbytery  unquestionably  showed 
not  a  little  indulgence*  in  declaring  themselves 
so  far  satisfied  with  this,  as  to  decline  proceeding 
on  the  individual  case.  But  they  could  not  leave 
the  business  in  this  ambiguous  form,  without  for- 
feiting their  claim  to  firmness  and  integrity,  and 
without  exposing  the  city  and  the  country  to  con- 
stant agitation  and  apprehension* 

A  solemn  deliberation  having  therefore  become 
necessary,  it  was  now  resolved  on, — it  was  not 
objected  to, — or  if  objections  were  hinted  at, 
they  were  either  not  insisted  on,  or  overruled  by 
the  Presbytery.  And  though  no  particular  mode 
of  conducting  the  discussion  was  laid  down,  yet, 
not  a  single  member  uttered  a  syllable,  disre- 
spectful or  unkind  towards  his  brother. 

Could  it  be  inconsistent  with  justice,  or  truth. 
or  propriety,  to  consider  the  lawfulness  of  em- 
ploying an  Organ  in  the  public  worship  of  this 
national  established  church:  If  it  was  lawful, 
then  there  was  no  trangression.  If  unlawful, 
then  too  the  business  was  likeh  to  be  settled 
without  proceeding  much  farther.  For  the  unani- 
mous de-ire  of  the  Presbyter)  manifestly  was,  to 
avoid,  a>  long  ;»<  possible,  ever}  stricture  on  the 
circumstance  of  the  case  which  could  lead  to 
personalities,  and  to  treat  the  minister  and  con- 

gation  of  St  Andrew's  church  with  all  p 
Me  lenity 


27 

We  shall  long  remember  two  arguments  whidh 

were  employed  in  the  course  of  this  deliberation, 
and  which  we  apprehend  it  is  consistent  with 
justice,  truth,  and  propriety,  to  consider  in  this 
place. 

1st.  That  God  hath  implanted  in  man  a  taste 
for  music,  which  ought  to  be  cultivated  by  intro- 
ducing Organs  into  our  churches,  where,  as  well 
as  in  camps,  great  and  good  effects  might  be  ex- 
pected from  it. 

If  this  argument  be  applicable  at  all  to  the 
business  in  hand,  it  amounts  to  this, — that  every 
principle,  taste,  faculty  or  propensity,  implanted 
in  man  by  the  goodness  of  God,  ought  to  be 
exercised  in  the  house  of  God,  on  a  Christian 
Sabbath,  in  a  Christian  assembly,  and  in  Chris- 
tian worship.  An  argument  of  this  kind  needs 
no  refutation,  to  any  who  know  what  is  forbidden 
in  the  second  commandment. 

But  as  something  like  it  is  employed  by  those 
who  call  themselves  the  congregation  of  St.  An- 
drew's, a  short  illustration  of  its  fallacy  may  be 
requisite.  The  Corinthians  were  charged  by  the 
apostle  Paul  with  a  gross  profanation  of  the 
Lord's  Supper.  To  this  they  might  have  replied, 
that  God,  in  his  great  goodness,  had  implanted 
in  every  one  of  them,  a  taste  and  propensity  to 
eat  and  to  drink  plentifully,  and  given  them  all 
the  faculties  necessary  for  doing  so;  which,  there- 
fore, it  was  their  duty  to  cultivate  and  exercise 
in  the  house  of  God,  and  at  the  Lord's  table. 
They  might  have  added,  that  there  was  no  law 
of  the  church,  nor  of  the  state,  against  doing 
what  they  had  done, — that  they  encroached  on 
no  sacred  privilege, — on  no  civil  right  of  any 
man.     In  a  word,  they  might  have  anticipated 


ftlmof  sentiment,  and  even  expression,  in 

the  petition  of  this  congregation.  Bui  they  did 
00  Buch  tiling:  they  repented  of  what  they  had 
done 

2d.  A  second  argument,  which  was  urged  with 
much  earnestness  in  favour  of  Organs,  was  built 
on  something  said,  written  or  done,  by  the 
psalmist  David,  and  on  something  recorded  in 
the  hook  of  Revelations. 

if  this  he  almost  the  first  instance  of  a  Chris- 
tian pleading  divine  authority  for  the  use  of  Or- 
gans in  religious  worship,  the  singularity  may 
excite  some  suspicion  that  the  argument  is  not 
well  founded. 

Had  the  primitive  church  considered  Oru*aiib 
as  a  part  of  instituted  worship,  they  would,  no 
doubt,  have  used  them,  or  recommended  them, 
or  regretted  the  want  of  them.  After  the  es- 
tablishment of  Christianity,  and  its  consequent 
prosperity,  no  reason  can  be  given  why  they 
were  not  used,  if  they  were  sanctioned  by  the 
prophet  David,  and  the  apostle  John.  But,  no 
less  than  eight  hundred  years  had  elapsed,  after 
the  commencement  of  the  Christian  era,  before 
Organs  were  resorted  to;  and  even  then,  they 
were  not  defended  by  an  appeal  to  Scripture,  but 
by  asserting  a  power  in  the  church  to  appoint  a 
ritual  for  divine  service.  This  power  was,  in  a 
e,  denied  by  the  reformers,  who  en- 
quired t<>  restore  the  primitive  simplicity  of 
Christian  worship.  We  learn  from  Stewart,  in 
his  History  of  the  Reformation,  that  in  our  land, 
their  endeavours  were  crowned  with  signal  BUC- 
200,  he  Bays,  ik  That  the  Protectants 
•  in  Scotland,  when  they  accomplished  the  Re- 
"  formation  in  the  year  1500,  departed  in  ;•  \ 


29 

*k  extremity  from  the  splendour  and  pomp  of  the 
"  Romish  forms  and  ceremonies,  disdaining  to 
"  flatter  the  senses  and  imagination;  and  confi- 
"  dent  and  secure  that  the  native  purity  and 
"  brightness  of  their  doctrines,  were  fully  suf- 
11  ficient  to  uphold  them.  All  exterior  greatness, 
"  the  allurement  of  magnificence,  the  charm  of 
"  painting,  and  the  enchantment  of  music,  were 
"  disregarded,  not  oniy  as  mean  and  useless  arti- 
"jices,  but  as  dangerous  trappings,  which  might 
"  obscure  and  degrade  the  interests  and  dignity  of 
u  truth.  They  sought  to  revive  the  plainness  and 
u  sincerity  of  primitive  times." 

It  may  be  added,  that  if  the  practices  of  an 
Old  Testament  prophet  are  understood  to  be  re- 
commended under  the  New  Testament,  then  all 
the  particulars  of  his  usage  must  have  the  same 
authority,  dancing,  or  piping,  among  the  rest. 
Nothing,  however,  can  be  more  manifest,  than 
that  all  Christian  divines,  with  the  apostle  Paul 
at  their  head,  have  believed,  that  the  Old  Testa- 
ment worship  was  altered  so  as  to  suit  New 
Testament  times,  and  that  they  had  authority 
from  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  to  teach  this  doc- 
trine. Nor  can  it  be  doubted,  that  such  alteration 
did  take  place  in  the  present  instance,  with  more 
precision  than  in  any  other  particular ;  for  sing- 
ing is  the  only  instituted  mode  of  performing 
this  part  of  religious  worship,  and  was  exclusive- 
ly employed  for  that  purpose,  upwards  of  eight 
hundred  years. 

We  shall  now  proceed  to  a  more  particular  re- 
view of  the  reasons  on  which   the  dissentients, 
after  mature  reflection  and  research,  have  chosen 
io  rest  their  dissent.    These  reasons  are,  certain]  v. 
3* 


30 

both  in  respect  of  matter  and  manner,  liable  to 
•  criticism,  and  easy  refutation. 

1st.  The  first  reason  of  dissent  might  be  an- 
gwered,  merely  by  copying  it,  leaving  out  the 
particle  not  in  every  negation,  and  discreetly  re- 
placing it  in  almost  every  affirmation.  The  result 
would  be  very  nearly  a  true  statement,  but  the 
mode  of  producing  it  not  sufficiently  dignified  for 
the  Presbytery,  nor  respectful  to  the  dissentients. 

We  therefore  refer  them  to  their  own  motion, 
for  an  answer  to  their  first  reason.  This  motion 
decides  the  general  question,  with  no  less  preci- 
sion than  the  Presbytery's  sentence,  and  the  con- 
tradiction which  it  gives  to  this  reason  of  dissent, 
is  so  striking,  that  it  needs  only  to  be  pointed 
out.  In  the  motion,  they  declare  it  as  their  judg- 
ment, that  the  introduction  "  of  an  Organ  into 
"  public  worship  is  inexpedient  and  unauthorised 
"  in  our  church."  And  in  the  first  reason  of  dis- 
sent, they  blame  the  Presbytery  for  deciding  the 
general  point  of  its  lawfulness  and  utility.  Now, 
it  must  be  evident  to  every  ordinary  understand- 
ing, that  the  motion  decides  the  general  point,  as 
positively  as  the  sentence  of  the  Presbytery. 

Another  fact  the  dissentients  ought  not  to  have 
overlooked,  that  there  was  no  individual  case  be- 
fore the  Presbytery:  no  parties  were  called,  and 
no  persons  were  considered,  or  considered  thein- 
seh  es,  as  parties.  The  name  of  the  minister  prin- 
cipally concerned  having  been  unintentionally 
passed  over  in  calling  the  roll,  was,  at  the  very 
desire  of  one  of  the  dissentients,  called  in  the 
vote,  which  shows  that  he   did  not  then   consider 

him  as  a  party, 
The  simple  truth  is,  thai  this  was  a  delibera- 


31 

tion  which  might  have  led  to  the  calling  of  par- 
ties, had  not  the  Presbytery,  regardless  of  all 
provocation,  and  more  indulgent  to  others  than 
they  have  experienced  from  them  in  return,  kept 
steadily  to  their  original  intention,  of  treating  all 
who  were  implicated  in  this  business  with  the  ut- 
most delicacy;  at  the  same  time  performing  their 
duty  to  the  church  and  to  the  public  with  firmness 
and  decision. 

2d.  The  second  reason  of  dissent  is  so  multi- 
farious that  it  cannot  legitimately  be  reduced  to 
any  common  head.  Part  of  it  is  evidently  a  re- 
petition of  what  the  dissentients  had  stated  in  their 
first  reason  of  dissent,  respecting  the  individual 
case,  and  has  been  answered  already.  The  dis- 
sentients then  complain  that  they  were  taken  by 
surprise,  and  could  "  not  be  supposed  to  have 
"  formed  a  positive  judgment  on  the  general 
"  question;  nay,  that  they  knew  not  they  were  to 
"  give  an  opinion"  concerning  it. 

This  is  certainly  not  a  little  wonderful.  Had 
not  more  than  two  years  elapsed  since  the  atten- 
tion of  this  city  and  neighbourhood  was  directed 
to  this  subject,  and  must  have  met  them  almost  in 
every  company?  Had  not  the  communication 
from  the  Lord  Provost  been  more  than  a  month 
on  the  table  of  the  Presbytery?  Was  it  not  known, 
that  at  this  meeting  of  Presbytery  that  communi- 
cation was  to  be  taken  under  consideration? 

But  it  seems  they  had  formed  a  positive  opinion 
on  two  points,  much  more  difficult  than  this:  the 
inexpediency  of  introducing  Organs,  and  that  the 
me  of  them  is  unauthorised  in  our  church; — an 
accurate  knowledge  of  men,  times,  and  places,  and 
a  distinct  review  of  all  the  acts  of  Assembly,  was 
indispensably  necessary  to  warrant  such  an  opi- 


32 

iiion.  And  how,  in  the  nature  pf  things,  coin 
positive  judgment  on  these  particular  points  be 
formed,  without  coming  to  a  similar  judgment  on 
the  general  question,  which  is  evidently  less  in- 
tricate,  and  attended  with  less  difficulty;  which 
the  Catechisms,  and  Confession  of  this  church, 
and  our  other  solemn  engagements  at  ordination, 
are  of  themselves  sufficient  to  ascertain? 

The  term,  unauthorised,  may  have  been  selected 
with  some  dexterity;  and  the  dissentients  seem  to 
regret  that  it  was  not  adopted  by  the  Presbytery. 
But  if  it  was  intended  as  an  insinuation  that  our 
church  had  heretofore  never  interposed  her  au- 
thority in  opposition  to  Organs,  and  a  prepara- 
tion for  asking  and  obtaining  her  authority  in 
favour  of  them,  the  adopting  of  such  an  insidious 
term  would,  we  apprehend,  have  been  a  mean 
and  unbecoming  sacrifice  of  truth,  an  unmanly 
dereliction  of  principle,  and  a  flagrant  violation 
of  that  admirable  ecclesiastical  constitution,  and 
of  those  invaluable  civil  rights,  which  were  pur- 
chased by  our  ancestors,  at  the  expense  of  their 
talents,  their  treasure,  and  their  blood.  It  would 
have  enervated  the  Presbytery's  sentence,  and 
rendered  it  utterly  insufficient  for  the  purposes  of 
peace  and  order,  which  have  been  accomplished 
and  secured  by  it,  as  it  now  stands. 

3d.  The  third  reason  of  dissent  contains  a  pro- 
fession of  the  greatest  respect  and  affection  from 
the  dissentients  towards  their  brethren.  We  cheer- 
fully acknowledge  and  return  the  compliment 

As  this  is  the  last  and  principal  reason  of  dis- 
sents without  which  we  are  informed  there  would 
have  been  do  dissent,  nor  even,  perhaps,  a  divi- 
sion of  the  Pre>b\tery  on  the  subject,  we  lament 
that  there  is  so  little  lucid  order,   or  logical  pre- 


eision  in  it.  But  we  presume,  the  argument  it 
contains  maybe  comprehended  in  the  two  follow- 
ing propositions. 

1st.  That  there  is  nothing  in  the  constitution,  or 
laws,  of  the  church  or  state,  inconsistent  with, 
opposite,  or  contrary  to  the  use  of  Organs  in  re- 
ligious worship. 

2d.  That  Organs  may  now,  or  hereafter,  be 
introduced,  by  the  authority  of  the  church  of 
Scotland. 

Both  these  propositions  we  consider  as  quite 
unfounded  and  untenable,  and  are  not  a  little  sur- 
prised that  an}7  Scotch  Presbyterian  should  ven- 
ture to  assert  them. 

The  constitution  of  our  church  may  be  easily 
deduced  from  her  principles  and  usages.  Her 
great  and  leading  principles  are  contained  in  the 
Scriptures,  as  these  are  explained  in  our  acknow- 
ledged standards;  and  from  these  we  derive  evi~ 
dence,  little  short  of  demonstration,  subversive  of 
these  propositions. 

We  might  have  hesitated  to  produce  some  part 
of  this  evidence  to  the  learned  dissentients,  but  as 
a  very  respectable  congregation  are  implicated 
in  this  business,  there  may  be  no  impropriety  in 
giving  them  an  opportunity  of  being  reminded 
of  some  things  which  they  were  taught  in  their 
youth. 

The  second  commandment  is  surely  a  law  of 
this  church,  for  it  is  a  law  of  God:  And  the 
church  in  her  authoritative  commentary,  says,  in 
the  Shorter  Catechism,  "  The  second  command- 
"  ment  requireth  the  keeping  pure  and  entire  all 
"  such  religious  worship  and  ordinances  as  God 
"  hath  appointed  in  his  word."  Query,  Is  that 
religious  worship  kept  pure,  according  to  God's 


■  . 

appointment,  which  i>  blended  and  mixed  with 
human  inventions,  at  least  700  years  later  than 
the  death  of  the  la^t  of  the  apostles  ? — u  Tin. 
"  coiul  commandment  forbidaeth  the  worshipping 

"  of  God  by  images,  or  any  other  way  not  ap- 
"  pointed  in  his  word."  Query.  Was  this  way 
of  Organs  appointed  in  his  word? — In  the  La] 
Catechism,  the  second  commandment  requiretfa 
as  in  the  Shorter,  and  particularly  sanctions 
thanksgiving;  but  it  farther  required),  "  disap- 
"proving,  detecting,  opposing,  all  false  worship, 
"  and,  according  to  each  one's  place  and  calling, 
u  removing  it."  Query,  Is  not  all  worship  false, 
which  is  not  instituted  and  appointed: — The  sins 
forbidden  in  the  second  commandment  are  "  all 
"  devising,  counselling,  commanding,  using,  and 
"  any  wise  approving,  any  religious  worship  not 
"  instituted  by  God  himself."  It  likewise  forbids 
"  corrupting  the  worship  of  God,  adding  to  it,  or 
"  taking  from  it,  whether  invented  and  taken  up 
"  of  ourselves,  or  received  by  tradition,  from 
"  others,  though  under  the  title  of  antiquity,  cus- 
"  torn,  devotion,  or  any  other  pretence  whatso- 
"  ever,"  &c. 

These  passages  contain  the  great  and  leading 
principles  of  our  ecclesiastical  constitution,  re- 
specting the  worship  of  God.  And  the  Confes- 
sion of  Faith  is  equally  explicit  on  this  point. 
'<  The  acceptable  way  of  worshipping  the  true 

M  God  is  instituted  by  himself,   and  SO  limited  by 

"  his  own  revealed  Will,  that  he  may  not  be  wor- 
"  shipped   according  to  the  imaginations  and  efe- 

1  rices  of  men,73 

That   Organs  were  an  abomination  to  our  ve- 
nerable  ancestors,    who   assisted    in   corapo 
these  ecclesiastical  standards,  or  sanctioned  them 


with  their  most  solemn  approbation,  is  an  his- 
torical fact,  established  by  the  most  unexception- 
able authorities.  Thus,  Baillie,  vol.  1,  let.  43, 
page  421,  dated  18th  February,  1644,  and  ad- 
dressed to  Scotland,  says,  "  We  had  so  contrived 
"  it  with  my  Lord  Wharton,  that  the  lords  that 
li  day  did  petition  the  Assembly  that  they  might 
''  have  one  of  the  Divines  to  attend  their  House 
"  for  a  week,  as  it  came  about,  to  pray  to  God 
i(  for  them.  Some  days  thereafter  the  Lower 
"  House  petitioned  for  the  same.  Both  their  de- 
"  sires  were  gladly  granted:  for  by  this  means 
i;  the  relicks  of  the  Service-book,  which  till  then 
••  was  every  day  used  in  both  Houses,  are  at  last 
;'  banished.  Paul's  and  Westminster  are  purged 
t;  of  their  images,  Organs,  and  all  which  gave 
"  offence.  My  Lord  Manchester  made  two  fair 
M  bonfires  of  such  trinkets  at  Cambridge." — All 
the  commissioners  at  London,  in  their  letter  to 
the  General  Assembly,  dated  20th  May,  1644, 
thus  express  themselves,  "  We  cannot  but  admire 
11  the  good  hand  of  God  in  the  great  things  done 
;;  here  already,  particularly  that  the  Covenant 
,;  (the  foundation  of  the  whole  work)  is  taken ; 
i;  prelacy  and  the  whole  train  thereof  extirpated; 
"  the  Service-book  in  many  places  forsaken; 
"  plain  and  powerful  preaching  set  up;  many 
"  colleges  in  Cambridge  provided  with  such  mi- 
'•  nisters  as  are  most  zealous  of  the  best  reform  a- 
"  tion,  altars  removed,  the  communion  in  some 
"  places  given  at  the  table  with  sitting;  the  great 
"  Organs  at  Paul's  and  Peter's,  Westminster, 
"  taken  down ;  images,  and  many  other  monu- 
<c  ments  of  idolatry,  defaced  and  abolished  ;  the 
14  Chapel  Royal  at  Whitehall  purged  and  re- 
*•  formed;  and  all  by  authority,  in  a  quiet  man- 


36 

••  nei.  at  m  on-day."  Nay,  the  i>  ii>l\. 

1644,  in  their  answer  to  the  Right  K<\.  the  Ajb- 
aembly  of  Divines  in  the  Kirk  of  England,  not 
onh  adopt  the  sentiments  of' their  commissioners 
at  London,  but  express  them,  if  possible,  with 
greater  energy,  force,  and  triumph.  "  We  were 
"  greatly  refreshed  to  hear  by  letters  from  our 
"  commissioners  there  with  you,  and  by  a  more 
"  particular  relation  from  the  Lord  Waristown, 
11  now  with  ns,  of  your  praiseworthy  proceed- 
"  ings,   and    of  th.  .rood  things  the  Lord 

"  hath  wrought  among  you  and  for  you  :  Shall 
u  it  seem  a  small  thing  in  our  eyes  that  the  Cove- 
"  nant  (the  foundation  of  the  whole  work)  is 
"  taken:   That  antichristian  prelacy,  with  all  the 

■tin  thereof,  is  extirpate:  That  the  door  of  a 
"  right  entry  unto  faithful  shepherds  i-  opened: 
"  Many  corruptions,  as  altars,  images,  and  other 
•*  monuments  of  idolatry  and  superstition,  re- 
•;  moved,  defaced,  and  abolished ;  the  Service- 
v'  book  in  many  places  forsaken,  and  plain  and 
u  powerful  preaching  set  up ;  the  great  On 
-'  at  PauVs  and  Peter's  taken  down;  that  the 
•;  Royal  Chapel  is  purged  and  reformed;  sacra- 
"  ments  sincerely  administrate,  and  according  to 
u  the  pattern  on  the  mount." 

The  great  and  leading  principles  of  our  eccle- 

tical  constitution  have  been  subscribed  and 
avowed  by  every  minister  of  the  Presbytery,  be- 

God  and  men,  in  the  DHOS1  solemn  maiUie 

articles  of  their  faith.     Whatever,  then,  thej  maj 

they  must   be  a  law  to  them.      ll  i^ 

for  the  dissentients  to  judge  whether  this  third 

son  of  dissent  be  compatible  *  itfa  this  law,  and 
consistent  with  truth  and/ti 

About  the  tinje  o\'  the  Union  with  England, 


.37 

there  were  some  apprehensions  of  danger  to  the 
uniformity  of  our  national  worship.  Our  church 
had  hitherto  rested  with  confidence  on  her  Cate- 
chisms and  ratified  Confession,  but  now  thought 
that  something  more  might  be  done.  Accord- 
ingly, in  1707,  the  Assembly  passed  the  Act 
against  Innovations  in  the  worship  of  God.  "  It 
;i  discharges  the  practice  of  all  innovations  in 
"  divine  worship  within  this  church,  and  requires 
"  and  obtests  all  the  ministers  of  this  church. 
*•  especially  those  in  whose  bounds  such  innova- 
w  tions  are,  or  may  happen  to  be,  to  represent  to 
"  their  people  the  evil  thereof,  and  seriously  to 
,;  exhort  them  to  beware  of  them,  and  to  deal 
"  with  such  as  practise  them,  in  order  to  their  re- 
"  covery  and  reformation."  So  much  convinced 
were  this  Assembly,  that  the  removing  and  sup- 
pressing of  innovations  was  Vested  in  the  exe- 
cutive power  by  the  ratification  of  the  Confes- 
sion, and  the  various  acts  of  security,  that  they 
authorize  application  to  be  made  to  government 
for  that  purpose. 

It  did  not  occur  to  this  Assembly  that  any  thing 
more  was  necessary,  nor,  perhaps,  that  any  thing 
more  could  be  done.  But  in  1711,  it  was  en- 
acted, that  every  minister,  before  his  ordination, 
da  acknowledge  the  obligation  of  this  act  against 
innovation;  promising  in  the  most  public  and 
solemn  manner,  in  the  house  of  God,  in  pre- 
sence of  the  Presbytery  and  an  assembled  con- 
gregation, "  firmly  and  constantly  to  adhere  to, 
"  and  to  the  utmost  of  his  power,  assert,  mam- 
11  tain,  and  defend  the  purity  of  worship,  as 
%i  presently  practised  in  this  national  church,  and 

-erted  in  the  fifteenth  act  of  Assembly.  1 7 
which  is  the  act  above  recited. 
4 


38 

Thus  the  uniformity  of  our  worship  v.,. 
out  of  the  hands  of  lawyers  and  metaphysiti 
and  brought  home  to  the  conscience,  the  honour, 
and  the  honesty  of  every  individual  minister  of 
our  church. 

It  is  surely  impossible  that  any  of  the  dissen- 
tients will  again  affirm,  that  no  law  of  the  church 
has  yet  determined  the  question  concerning  Or- 
5  or  instrumental  music  in  our  public  worship, 
when  it  appears  with  so  much  evidence  to  be  in- 
consistent, not  only  with  our  ecclesiastical  laws, 
but  with  the  great,  leading,  and  fundamental 
principles  of  our  constitution. 

This  reasoning  needs  no  confirmation,  but  it 
may  receive  much  illustration  from  the  prevail- 
ing sentiments,  opinions,  and  customs  of  our 
country. 

No  religious  sgutiment  is   more  powerful  and 
universal  among  the  people  of  Scotland,  than  an 
attachment  to  that  simple,  spiritual,  and  unorna- 
mented  worship,  which  is  described  in  our  stand- 
ards— which   was   practised  under  the  sword    oi 
"cution — reverenced  by  our  fathers,  adhered 
to  from  principles  of  patriotism,   as  well   as  reli- 
gion, and  retained  as  the  fruit  of  victory,  and  the 
pledge  of  liberty.     This   attachment   to  simple 
,  is  so  strong,  and  so  universal)  that  all 
the   dissenters   from    this  church,  numerous  and 
is  they  are,  have  never  deviated  from 
her  forms  el'  worship.     In  the  west  of  Scotland 
particularly,  this  attachment,  and  the  habits  eon- 
ith  it,  are  so  predominant,   and  have  so 
to  form  a  consuetudinary  law, 
independent  of  all  others,  to  which  the  dissentients 
and  the  Presbytery  are  bound  to  conform. 

Hut  the  people  vi'  Scotland  do  not  defend  the 


39 

purity  and  uniformity  of  their  national  worship 

merely  upon  ecclesiastical  grounds — they  claim 
these,  and  the  tranquillity  which  attends  them,  ajs 
their  birth-right — as  a  portion  of  their  political 
liberty,  to  which  they  have  the  highest  legal,  as 
well  as  just  and  equitable  title — a  title  which,  they 
are  well  assured,  will  be  made  effectual  by  the 
executive  power,  vested  in  all  the  king's  courts 
and  judges.  To  prefer  this  claim  is  the  privilege 
of  every  Scotsman  since  the  year  1688,  or  at 
least  since  the  Union  of  the  two  kingdoms;  and, 
of  course,  if  any  of  their  countrymen  should  be 
found  making  an  attack  on  this  purity  and  uni- 
formity of  worship,  the  Presbytery  of  Glasgow 
will  not  applaud  either  their  wisdom  or  their 
patriotism. 

As  the  dissentients  do  not  seem  very  clearly  to 
understand  these  things,  it  may  not  be  improper 
to  explain  them. 

Our  ancestors,  immediately  after  the  Revolu- 
tion, were,  undoubtedly,  very  solicitous  to  have 
their  religion  and  their  religious  worship  secured 
from  change  and  innovation.  This  security  they 
obtained  by  the  parliamentary  ratification  of  the 
Confession  of  Faith ;  which  was  generally  be- 
lieved at  that  time  to  make  the  Confession  a  part 
of  the  law  of  the  land,  and  consequently  to  invest 
the  king's  judges  with  full  authority  to  give  it 
execution.  Many  are  still  of  this  opinion.  But 
before  the  year  L700,  some  persons  seem  to  have 
thought  that  the  term  ratification,  and  other  terms 
employed  in  that  act,  were  not  sufficient  to  con- 
vex the  right  of  enforcing  execution  to  the  civil 
magistrate. 

To  remove  every  doubt  on  this  important  sub- 
ject, it  was  resolved  to  proceed  with  the  Con- 


40 

on  of  Faith,   as  they  had  done  with  n 
to  the  Claim  of  Rights,   which  is  not  law,   hut  ;t 
quarry  out  of  which  main  of  our  most  valuable 
have  been  taken. 

In  order  to  embody  certain  articles  of  the  Con- 
on  with  the  laws  of  the  country,  and  thus 
cure  the  execution  of  them  without  any  contro- 
versy,   the  Acts  of  Security  were  passed  in  the 
rs  1700,  1702,  and  1703.     These  acts,  how- 
.   relate  chiefly  to  the  doctrine  and  govern- 
ment  of  the  church.     No  particular  mention  is 
made  of  the  worship  till  the  year  170.5,  when  an 
act  was  passed  for  a  treaty  with  England,  the  last 
clause  of  which  is  in  these  words,  "  Providing 
"  also,  that  the  said  commissioners  shall  not  treat 
"  of  or    concerning   any  alteration    of  the   icor- 
"  ship,   discipline  and  government  of  the  church 
u  of  this  kingdom,  as  now  by  law  established." 

This  is  almost  the  first  time  that  the  Scotch  Par- 
liament distinguished  the  worship  from  the  doc- 
trine, government  and  discipline  of  this  church. 
Now,  that  a  union  with  England  was  projected, 
these  wise  men  foresaw  increasing  danger  to  the 
worship  of  this  church,  and  were  determined  to 
provide  against  it. 

With  this  view,  the  Act  of  Security,  1707, 
was  framed  and  enacted.  Indeed,  this  seems  to 
have  been  the  principal  intention  of  this  act;  for 
no  new  clause  is  introduced,  except  what  relates 
to  the  purity  and  uniformity  of  our  worship. 
Without  this,  any  of  the  former  acts  might  have 
answered  the  purpose  almost  ;is  well  as  this  one. 
Since,  however,  the  necessity  of  securing  our 
ivorshi/j  had  been  suggested,  the  Parliament  of 
Scotland  were  resolved  that  this  should  be  done 
with    precision,    with    authorities,    and    will)    so- 


41 

lemnities  unknown  in  any  other  transactions  be- 
tween independent  states. 

It  was  enacted  in  Scotland,  and  declared  to  be 
a  fundamental  condition  of  the  Union:  It  was 
ratified  by  the  English  Parliament,  and  engrossed 
verbatim  in  the  Treaty  of  Union. 

Henceforth,  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  Scotch 
uniformity  of  worship  is  secured  as  fully  as  it  can 
be  by  human  laws:  for  the  execution  of  this,'  as 
well  as  every  other  law,  is  committed  to  the  king, 
who,  at  his  coronation,  must  swear  and  subscribe 
that  he  shall  "  inviolably  maintain  and  preserve 
"  the  foresaid  settlement  of  the  true  Protestant 
"  religion,  with  the  government,  worship,  disci- 
"  pline,  rights  and  privileges  of  this  church,  as 
"  above  established  by  the  laws  of  this  kingdom, 
"  in  prosecution  of  the  Claim  of  Rights." — And 
from  the  king,  the  execution  of  this,  still  more 
than  any  other  law,  must  pass  to  the  king's  courts 
and  judges;  to  the  Judge  Ordinary  of  the  place 
in  the  first  instance,  and  in  due  course  to  the 
House  of  Lords. 

This  very  important,  solemn  and  extraordinary 
law,  has  enacted,  that  the  forms  and  purity  of  our 
worship  shall  be  unalterable — tlia  they  shall  be 
continued  to  the  people  of  this  land  to  all  suc- 
ceeding generations,  as  they  were  practised  in 
1707:  and  further,  "  that  this  act  shall  be  held 
';  and  observed,  in  all  time  coming,  as  a  funda- 
"  mental  and  essential  condition  of  any  treaty  or 
"  union  to  be  concluded  betwixt  the  two  king- 
"  doms,  without  any  alteration  thereof,  or  dero- 
"  gation  thereto,  in  any  sort,  for  ever" 

As  to  the  strictness  with  which  these  acts 
should  be  interpreted,  we  need  not  descend  to 
altercation  with  the  dissentients.  Enemies  bein^ 
4* 


42 

judge-,  they  cannot  be  interpreted  more  stricth 
than  their  fair  construction  and  primary  intention 
will  justify. 

This  we  advance  on  the  authority  of  a  co- 
temporary  historian,  and  celebrated  prelate  of  the 
Church  of  England,  who  records  the  pa 
these  acts  with  manifest  regret  Burnet,  '  Hist. 
of  his  Own  Times,'  vol.  2,  page  212,  speaks 
thus  of  the  act,  1703,  "  By  this,  all  the  hopes  of 
"  the  Episcopal  party  were  lost,  and  every  thing 
"  relating  to  the  church  did  iuot  only  continue  in 
;-  the  same  state  in  which  it  was  during  the  for- 
"  mer  reign,  but  the  Presbyterians  got  a  new  law 
"  in  their  favour,  which  gave  them  as  firm  a  settle- 
"  ment.  and  as  full  a  security,  as  law  could  give; 
"  for  an  act  passed,  not  only  confirming  the 
"  Claim  of  Rights,  upon  which  the  crown  had 
11  been  offered  to  the  late  king — one  of  its  arti- 
"  cles  being  against  prelacy,  and  for  a  parity  in 
"  the  church — but  it  was  declared  high  treason 
"  to  endeavour  any  alteration  of  it.  It  had  often 
"  been  proposed  to  the  late  king  to  pass  this  into 
"  an  act;  but  he  would  never  consent  to  it.  He 
"  said  he  had  taken  the  crown  on  the  terms  in 
"  that  claim,  and  that  therefore  he  would  never 
11  make  a  breach  in  any  part  of  it:  but  he  would 
M  not  bind  his  successors,  1>\  making  it  a  per- 
"  petual  law." — And  page  27G,  he  Bays  of 'the 
act,  1707,  as  follow-: — li  An  act  vras  prepared 
u  for  tg  the  Presb)  fa  mem,  by 

M  which  it  \s;i>  declared  to  he  the  only  govern- 
"  ment  of  that  church,  unalterable  in  all 
"  ing  and  the  maintaining  it  was  decli 

i  be  a  fbndamental  and  essential  article  and 
edition  of  the  Union:   and  this   act  wbi  to 
made    a    part   of    the  act   for    the  Union: 


43 

"  and  in  consequence  of  that,  was  to  be  ratified 
<;  by  another  Act  of  Parliament  in  England. 
"  Thus,  those  who  were  the  greatest  enemies  to 
"  presbytery  of  any  in  the  nation,  raised  the  cla- 
"  mour  of  the  danger  that  form  of  government 
"  would  be  in,  if  the  Union  went  on,  to  such  a 
;i  height,  that,  by  their  means,  this  act  was  carried 
"  as  far  as  human  law  could  go  for  their  security; 
"  for  by  this,  they  had  not  only  all  the  security 
i;  that  their  own  Parliament  could  give  them;  but 
"  the}7  were  to  have  the  faith  and  authority  of  the 
"  Parliament  of  England;  it  being,  in  the  stipu- 
"  lation,  made  an  essential  condition  of  the  Union: 
%;  The  carrying  this  matter  so  far,  was  done  in 
"  hopes  that  the  Parliament  of  England  would 
"  never  be  brought  to  pass  it.  This  act  was 
"  passed,  and  it  gave  an  entire  satisfaction  to 
"  those  who  were  disposed  to  receive  any;  but  no- 
"  thing  could  satisfy  men  who  made  use  of  this 
;s  only  to  inflame  others." — Hence,  according  to 
Burnet,  the  Act  of  Security  is  to  the  British 
Parliament  what  the  Barrier  Act  is  to  the  Ge- 
neral Assembly,  a  safeguard,  an  absolute  veto, 
against  the  reviving  of  antiquated  general 
questions,  or  the  agitating  of  new  ones,  with 
regard  to  the  doctrine,  worship,  discipline  and 
government  of  our  national  church.  The  bishop 
has  recorded,  a  century  ago,  the  justice  and  truth 
of  the  declaration  which  the  Presbytery  have 
emitted  on  the  7th  October  last,  but  in  which 
the  dissentients  cannot,  with  a  good  conscience, 
acquiesce. 

A\  ere  a  spirit  of  this  innovating  and  vacillating 
kind  to  invade  our  church,  we  tremble  for  the 
consequences.  Neither  the  Barrier  Act,  nor  the 
Act  of  Security,  would  be  able  to  prevent  her. 


14 

from  beginning  a  retrograde  course,  till  her  glory 
was  sunk,  and  utterly  lost,  in  the  darkness  of  the 
12th  century.    Then,  as  we  learn  from  IVIosbeim, 

vol.  2.  page  438,  "  The  rites  and  ceremonies 
"  used  in  divine  worship  were  greatly  augmented 

"  among  the  Greek-,  and  the  .same  superlilious 
"passion  for  the  introduction  of  new  observances, 
"  discovered  itself  in  all  the  Eastern  churches. 
"  The  Grecian,  Nestorian  and  Jacobite  pontiffs, 
"  that  were  any  way  remarkable  for  their  endlt, 
Xi  or  ambition,  were  desirous  of  transmitting  their 
"  names  to  posterity,  by  the  invention  of  some 
"  new  rite,  or  by  some  striking  change,  introduced 
11  into  the  method  of  worship  that  had  hitherto 
"  prevailed. — Thus,  some  attempted,  though  in 
"  vain,  to  render  their  names  immortal,  by  intro- 
11  during  a  new  method  of  reading  or  reciting 
"  the  prayers  of  the  church;  others  changed  the 
11  church  music,  others  again  tortured  their  in- 
u  ventions  to  find  out  some  new  mark  of  vene- 
"  ration  that  might  be  offered  to  the  relies  and 
"  images  of  the  saints;  while  several  ecclesiastics 
"  did  not  disdain  to  employ  their  time  with  the 
"  most  serious  assiduity,  in  embellishing  the  gar- 
"  ments  of  the  clergy;  and  in  forming  the  motions 
•'  and  postures  they  were  to  observe,  and  the  looks 
11  they  were  to  assume,  in  the  celebration  of  di- 
"  vine  worship." 

To  avert  so  direful  a  calamity  from  our  church 
and  our  country — to  crush  in  the  bud  so  scan- 
dalous a  prostitution  of  sacred  things,*  the  ma- 
gistrates and  city  council,  and  the  Presbytery  of 


'  This  approbation  of  Mosheim's  description  i-  expressed  in 
nevertheless,  il  is  just  •  and  ifl  i^  to 
description  this  langn  i 


45 

Glasgow,  have,  in  this  instance,  done  their  dot] 
with  integrity  and  honour;  and  in  whatever  light 
the  dissentients  may  view  the  deed,  we  have  plea- 
sure in  declaring,  and  that  in  perfect  consistency 
with  a  good  conscience,  that  it  has  the  most  un- 
qualified approbation  of  our  understanding  and 
our  heart. 

We  are  happy  to  find  it  admitted  by  the  dis- 
sentients, in  the  close  of  their  reasons,  that  there 
are  certain  general  and  leading  principles,  upon 
which  our  constitution  is  founded,  which  the 
church  has  not  power  to  alter.  None  of  her  ju- 
dicatories has  power  to  suppress  the  Christian  or 
Protestant  religion — to  change  one  article  of  the 
Confession  of  Faith — to  substitute  prelacy  or  in- 
dependency in  the  room  of  presbytery ; — in  a 
word,  to  authorize  any  practice,  or  to  enact  any 
law,  that  is  inconsistent  with,  or  contrary  to,  the 
laws  of  the  land,  especially  the  most  sacred  of  all 
her  laws,  namely,  the  Treaty  of  Union,  and  the 
acts  on  which  that  treaty  is  founded:  Conse- 
quently, no  ecclesiastical  court  in  Scotland  has 
power  to  alter  the  forms  of  our  worship,  or  to 
deprive  succeeding  generations  of  that  purity  and 
uniformity  of  religious  worship,  which  has  been 
the  glory  of  our  land  for  more  than  a  century. 

(Signed)  William  Porteous. 

Robert  Balfour. 
James  Lapslie. 
James  M'Lean. 

Glasgow,  1st  December,  1807. 


46 


.Minute  of  Presbytery,  January  6r/*,  1S0S. 

Dr.  Ritchie,  Dr.  Taylor,  jun.  and  Dr.  Lock- 
hart,  severally  pave  in  papers  in  consequence  of 
the  reservation  in  the  Presbytery's  last  minutes 
in  the  question  respecting  the  Organ,  which  pa- 
pers being  read,  the  Presbytery  order  the  same  to 
be  recorded,  simpliciter.     The  tenor  follows: 


Rev.  Dr.  Win.  Taylor's  Jun.  Explanation. 

It  is  with  reluctance  that  I  make  use  of  the 
liberty  which  the  Rev.  Presbytery  has  allowed 
me,  of  giving  in  an  explanation  of  my  reasons 
why  the  Presbytery  should  not  have  adopted, 
without  correction,  the  answers  that  their  com- 
mittee prepared  to  the  Reasons  of  Dissent,  in  the 
cause  of  the  Organ,  read  at  their  meeting  in  No- 
vember. I  was  out  of  the  country  when  this  bu- 
siness commenced;  I  was  astonished,  beyond  mea- 
sure, when  I  heard  of  it,  by  accident,  400  miles 
hence;  and  when  a  final  sentence  was  given  at  a 
succeeding  Presbytery,  I  had  the  honour  of  pre- 
siding in  the  court.  And  thus,  from  the  com- 
mencement to  the  close,  had  no  opportunity  of 
taking  part,  either  on  one  side  or  the  other,  in 
tins  singular  business.  I  am  sensible,  therefore, 
of  a  great  aversion  to  stir  it  at  this  period.  I  fed 
strongly  a  delicacy  which  forbids  me  to  seem  to 
interfere;  I  bow  to  the  sentence  of  the  Presby- 
tery, as  in  dutj  bound,  which  now  can  neither  be 
altered  or  appealed  from;  and  I  bear  a  high  re- 
spect toward-  the  members  of  the  committee,  who 
prepared  the  answers,  which  the  Presbytery  has, 


47 

in  lull,  adopted.  But  I  am  impelled  by  what  i 
owe  to  myself,  and  the  duty  I  owe  to  the  Pres- 
bytery, to  make  this  appearance,  however  reluc- 
tantly. For  I  cannot  allow,  that,  by  my  silence, 
it  should  be  understood,  that  I  sanctioned  a  pa- 
per, in  which  it  appears  to  me,  that  there  are 
many  things  altogether  improper,  and  which,  in 
my  opinion,  the  Presbytery,  careful  of  their  own 
fame  and  credit,  should  have  rigorously  exa- 
mined, and  in  many  particulars  amended. 

There  is  a  license  taken  in  the  geneml  frame 
of  the  paper  alluded  to,  that  is  altogethei*inde- 
fensible.  It  professes  to  be  Answers  to  Reasons 
of  Dissent  that  were  formerly  given  in;  and  the 
committee  who  framed  it,  were  appointed  for  the 
express  purpose  of  anwering  these  reasons.  But 
not  confining  themselves  to  the  reasons  put  into 
their  hands  by  the  reverend  Presbytery,  they  go 
into  a  wide  field  of  historical  detail,  no  way  ne- 
cessary; they  set  about  recollecting  and  answer- 
ing the  arguments  that  were  used,  viva  voce,  in 
the  presbyterial  discussion  by  different  members, 
and  that  had  no  place  in  the  writing  they  were  to 
answer;  and  enlarge  in  this  manner  on  the  ge- 
neral argument.  This  was  manifestly  leaving 
the  business  that  was  entrusted  to  them  by  the 
reverend  Presbytery,  and  doing  what  was  alto- 
gether illicit,  and  unusual  in  such  cases. 

In  these  answers,  I  perceive  also,  with  much 
regret,  a  mode  of  speaking  often  used,  which 
might  well  have  been  spared,  in  a  paper  that  the 
reverend  Presbytery  was  to  adopt  as  theirs;  in 
which  there  is  heat  and  passion;  and  which, 
heard  by  the  ignorant  and  prejudiced,  is,  in  va- 
rious instances,  too  liable  to  Unhappy  miscon- 
struction.    A  heathen  could  say,  that  it  became 


mull  who  were  to  deliberate  about  difficult  mat- 
ters, to  be  free  from  passion.  And.  surely,  the 
language  which  the  Presbytery  adopt-,  should 
be  calm,  and  grave,  and  moderate;  and  it  would 
be  unpardonable,  either  to  give,  as  an  example  to 
the  present  generation,  or  to  hand  down  to  pos- 
terity, what  is,  in  any  measure,  of  a  contrary 
character.  In  the  historical  detail  of  the  origin 
and  progress  of  this  business,  language  of  this 
heated  and  exaggerated  kind  is  sufficiently  ob- 
vious, ffhe  manner  in  which  the  congregation 
of  Str  Andrew's  is  mentioned  in  this  paper,  is 
surely  in  too  lofty  a  style — "  Some  persons,  de- 
"  scribing  themselves  as  the  congregation  of  St. 
"  Andrew's  church."  This  is  the  expression.  We 
should  speak  of  those,  who,  in  the  constitution  of 
our  court  were  absent,  with  respect;  and  know- 
ing the  existing  circumstances,  language  should 
have  been  avoided,  that  had  any  tendency  to  con- 
vey the  idea  that  there  were  pretensions  on  the 
part  of  those  spoken  of,  that  were  not  well 
founded. 

Allusion  is  made  in  the  paper  adopted  by  the 
Presbyter}7,  to  the  word  u  unauthorised,"  as  ap- 
plied to  the  Organ,  in  the  Reasons  of  Dissent. 
In  a  case,  hypothetically  stated  in  the  answers  to 
these  reasons,  this  is  said  to  be  an  "  insidious" 
term.  It  i-  not  in  this  way  that  the  reverend 
Presbytery  has  been  in  use  to  speak  01  the  dis- 
ions  of  it^  members.  Every  man  is  under- 
stood to  an  bo, hi  fide,  conscientiously,  and  with 
fairness:  And  1  have  no  doubt  that  thi>  will  am- 
ply apply  to  the  reasonings  that  have  pa6sed  on 
both  sides,  in  this  very  singular  question.  1  for- 
bear adverting  to  any  expressions  which  I  might 
think  alluded  improperly  to  a  respectable  mem- 


49 

be*,  chiefly  concerned  in  this   business,  as   lit 
sufficiently  able  to  defend  himself. 

There  is  a  passage  in  the  Answers,  which  the 
reverend  Presbytery  should  surely  have  hesi- 
tated in  adopting  as  theirs. — "  Had  the  primitive 
"  church  considered  Organs  as  a  part  of  insti- 
"  tuted  worship,  they  would,  no  doubt,  have  used 
"  them,  or  recommended  them,  or  regretted  the 
'•  want  of  them.  After  the  establishment  of 
"  Christianity,  and  its  consequent  prosperity,  no 
"  reason  can  be  given,  why  they  were  not  used,  if 
"  they  were  sanctioned  by  the  prophet  David,  and 
"  the  apostle  John.  But  no  less  than  eight  hun- 
"  dred  years  had  elapsed,  after  the  commence- 
"  ment  of  the  Christian  era,  before  Organs  were 
"  resorted  to."  It  is  said,  "  Had  the  primitive 
"  church  considered  Orgruis  as  a  part  of  insti- 
"  tuted  worship,  they  would  no  doubt  have  used 
"  them."  But  how  was  it  possible  to  use  what 
was  not  then  invented! — the  primitive  church 
taking  in  the  three  first,  or  four  first  centuries, 
and  the  Organ  was  not  invented  till  the  eighth 
century.  How  then  could  the  church  use  them, 
or  recommend  them  in  the  primitive  times,  or  in 
the  prosperous  times  of  Constantine,  when  the 
idea  of  an  Organ  was  not  then  formed!  How 
could  they  regret  the  want  of  them,  since,  "  Ig- 
noti  nulla  cupide  !"  It  is  obvious,  that  this  por- 
tion of  the  reasoning  in  the  Answers  is  built  upon 
a  gross  anachronism* — The  committee  who  pre- 


*  This  charge  of  Anachronism  is  unsupported,  either  by  ar- 
gument or  authority.  Organs  are  generally  allowed  to  be  the 
discovery  of  remote  antiquity.  The  quotations  given  after- 
wards from  Justin  Martyr.  Basil,  and  Chrysostom,  show,  that 
musical  instruments  had  this  name  at  the  time  these  Fathers 
nourished. — Indeed,  <!:;>  mere  existence  of  musical  instruo 


.30 

pared  the  Answers,   have   searched,  with  coiim- 

derable  labour,  into  the  records  of  church  and 
,  but  it  is  very  obvious,  from  what  has  been 
produced,  that  they  have  not  gone  deep  enough. 
They  have  shown,  with  much  conviction,  the 
presbyterian  church  must  differ  from  episcopacy; 
— that  it  is  averse  to  the  hierarchy  of  bishops — 
to  liturgy,  and  read  prayers,  and  that  it  has  a 
discipline  of  its  own.  But,  in  the  present  ques- 
tion, it  was  absolutely  necessary  to  show,  that  our 
church  went  still  farther  than  all  this,  and  that  it 
limited  and  defined  the  particulars  of  worship; 
because  Organs  do  not  belong  exclusively  to  the 
Episcopal  Church,  but  are  used  in  the  Church  of 
Geneva,  from  whence,  as  a  church,  we  are  sprung; 
and  in  Holland,  who  resemble  us  in  our  consti- 
tution and  worship.  The  committee,  in  my  opi- 
nion, should  have,  if  I  may  use  the  expression, 
stood  up  closer  to  the  argument.  The  Presby- 
tery, by  their  sentence,  built  high;  and  it  was  the 
business  of  the  committee  to  dig  deep.  I  should 
beg  the  Presbytery's  excuse,  for  taking  up  their 
time  so  long,  on  a  matter  that  is  now  decided  on* 
— The  rigidly  simple  Spartans  nailed  Tarpan- 
der's  harp  to  a  post,  because,  by  a  daring  inno- 
vation, he  had  added  one  string  to  it  beyond  what 
was  common.  The  Organ,  by  a  sentence  of 
Presbytery  not  appealed  from,  is  in  the  same 


in  the  fust  seven  centuries,  whether  ccrtlcd  Organs  or  not.  i>  bH 
that  the  Presbytery's  argument  is  concerned  with*  And  the 
argument  is  still  unanswered;  and  we  believe,  unanswerabli 
It  seven  or  eighl  centuries  elapsed,  before  Organs  or  instru- 
ments of  musk  were  introduced  into  Christian  worship}  and  if 
the  wasst  of  then  was,  during  all  that  period,  never  regretted 
bv  the  church,  it  is  ;«  decisive  proof,  that  tin-  primitive  Chris- 
tians regarded  them  as  unlawful,  and  incot 

<iP'r]'|.;;i|   pi  ,i 


51 

cure  position,  and  therefore  there  was  no  need  to 

say  any  thing  of  it.  All  that  I  intended,  was  to 
show,  that  the  reverend  Presbytery  should  have 
carefully  examined  the  Answers  to  the  Reasons  of 
Dissent,  and  made  some  corrections,  before  they 
adopted  them  as  their  own. 

(Signed)  William  Taylor,  Junior, 

Glasgow,  January  5th,  1808. 


Dr.  Lockhari's  Explanation. 

Having  received  permission  from  the  Rev. 
Presbytery  to  offer  certain  explanations  on  their 
Answers  to  Reasons  of  Dissent  from  the  sen- 
tence of  Presbytery,  with  regard  to  the  use 
of  the  Organ  in  the  public  worship  of  God,  I 
beg  leave  to  offer  the  following,  and  request  that 
they  may  be  put  on  record. 

1st.  I  must  be  explicitly  understood  as  ad- 
hering to  the  Presbytery's  sentence,  and  as  ap- 
proving of  the  answer  of  the  dissentients,  in  so 
far,  as  these,  answers  are  founded  on  the  prevail- 
ing sentiments  of  our  forefathers,  on  the  act  of 
the  church  against  innovations  in  the  worship  of 
God,  and  on  the  Act  of  Security. 

2d.  It  does  not  appear  to  me  that  the  dissen- 
tients, in  their  third  reason  of  dissent,  have 
charged  the  Presbytery  with  any  violation  of 
truth  and  justice.  I  consider  them  as  expressly 
denying  that  they  had  any  such  intention,  and  as 
merely  asserting,  that  they  could  not,  with  their 
view  of  the  subject,  adopt  the  sentence  of  the 
Presbytery,  without  a  criminal  inattention,  on 
their  part,  to  the  claims  of  truth  and  justice.     I 


must,  therefore,  hold  them  in  respect,  for  act 
under  the  influence  of  their  own  conviction,  and 
give  them  full  credit  for  the  liberality  of  sentiment 
which  they  have  expressed,    by  declaring  that 
they  have  the  I    respect  and  affection  for 

the  brethren  from  whose  judgment  they  diss< 
ft  would,  therefore,  in  my  opinion,  have  been 
tremely  desirable,  that  the  Presbytery,  in  their 
answer,  had  declined  employing  the  severe  lan- 
guage to  which  they  have  resorted;  and  which, 
I  apprehend,  they  would  not  have  employed,  had 
they  fully  weighed  the  explanation  given  by  the 
dissentient?. 

3d.  I  must  farther  express  my  opinion,  that  the 
Answers  on  the  part  of  the  Presby  tery,  ought  to 
have  been  conducted  without  any  allusion  to  the 
observations  of  individual  members  of  court,  sup- 
posed to  have  been  stated  viva  voce,  at  the  time  oi 
discussion,  but  not  stated  nor  even  alluded  to,  in 
the  reasons  given  by  the  dissentients.  I  likewise 
regret,  that  in  the  argument,  as  conducted  by  the 
Presbytery*  they  should  have  given  any  detailed 
statement,  in  relation  to  the  particular  case,  which 
led  to  the  discussion. 

4th.  Even  on  the  supposition  that  I  had  ap- 
proved of  that  part  of  the  Answers,  which  seems 
to  embrace  matter  foreign  to  the  sentence  of  the 
Presbytery,  and  to  the  Reasons  given  in  bj  the 
dissentients,  I  should  have  been  disposed  to  de] 
cate  the  introduction  of  thai  passage,  in  which 
die  illustration  of  the  Presbytery's  argument  i- 
taken  from  the  case  of  the  Corinthians,  in  their 
profanation  of  the  Lord's  Sup) 

Lastly,  While  I  admire  the  simplicity 
forms  ox  w  orship  obsen  t  d  in  our  national  church, 
liarly  congenial  to  the  spirit  oi'  Chris- 


53 

tianity,  1  am  unwilling  to  acquiesce  in  any  such 
application  of  the  second  commandment,  as  would 
charge  with  false  worship,  or  with  a  violation  of 
that  part  of  the  divine  law,  our  Christian  bre- 
thren of  other  churches,  whose  practice,  in  the 
instance  to  which  the  sentence  of  the  Presbytery 
refers,  is  different  from  our  own. 

(Signed)  John  Lockhart. 


The  reader  will,  no  doubt,  do  justice  to  tin 
liberality  and  indulgence  of  the  Rev.  Presbytery, 
in  allowing  the  preceding  Explanations  by  the 
Rev.  Dr.  Taylor,  junior,  and  Dr.  Lockhart,  to 
be  recorded,  as  none  of  these  gentlemen  had  ju- 
dicially dissented  or  complained  against  the  de- 
cision in  question.  And  it  is  hoped,  he  will  see 
the  same  spirit  of  liberality  and  indulgence,  in 
thus  publishing  these  explanations.  Candour  re- 
quires, that  the  public  should  be  put  in  possession 
of  every  paper  in  this  cause,  whether  favourable 
or  unfavourable  to  the  mode  of  procedure  adopted 
by  the  Presbytery.  Perhaps  an  opportunity  may 
be  taken,  in  the  sequel,  of  making  a  few  remarks 
on  these  explanations. 


Statement  of  the  grounds  on  which  the  Minis- 
ter of  St.  Andrew's  Church  thinks  himself 
vindicated  in  permitting,  and  of  the  facts  con- 
nected with  his  employing,  an  Organ  in  public 
worship  on  the  Lord's  Day. 

A   wish  had  for  years,  for  more   than    thirty 
.  lorn  cherished  by  the  congregation  o! 
5* 


5  i 

Andrew's  church,  to  have  an  Oi  eted,  and 

employed  in  public  worship.  Alter  the  proposal 
for  such  an  erection  had  been  repeatedly  made 
to  me,  bj  respectable  members  of  the  heads  of 
families  belonging  to  that  congregatiop,  1  at  last 
gave  my  assent,  with  the  fiill  approbation  of 
my  own  mind.  The  principles  upon  which  this 
ffly  assent  lias  been,  and  still  is  founded,  I  bare 
now  the  honour  to  lay  before  the  Prgsbytery. 
In  doing  this,  1  take  no  charge  of  the  Reasons  of 
Dissent  from  the  sentence  passed  by  the  Pres= 
bvterv  against  the  use  of  Organs.  These  rea- 
sons, though  not  fully  to  my  mind,  are  yet,  in 
m\  opinion,  valid  ns  to  the  main  point,  which  they 
are    meant   to  establish.      Neither  do  I  enter  the 

with  the  answer?  to  the-e  reasons,  with  many 
of  the  positions  in  which  I  perfectly  acrrec,  while 
yet,  in  many  respects,  my  opinions  are  different 
from  those  of  the  respondents.  But  it  becomes 
me,  in  vindication  of  my  congregation  and  my- 
self, to  open  up  the  grounds  upon  which  we  think 
we  had  the  right  to  employ  an  Organ  in  public 

ship. 

There  is  one,  and  but  one,  fixed  and  infallible 

standard  for  all    that    regards    public   worship. 

Whatever  is  not  agreeable  to,  and  founded  upon 

the  word  of  God,  ought  to  have  no  place  in  the 

iij)  of  Christians.    Nowj  in  looking  into 
Scriptures,  we  find,  that  before  the  giving  of  the 
few,  instrumental  music  \\a>   employed   bj   the 

\  i  tribes  of  Israel,  to  whom,  through  the  fa- 

.  the  promises  had  been  given.     When  we 

the  history  of  nations  that  were  stran- 

divine  revelation,  there  too  weiinduiri- 

,'i\.  the  i  u  <>i"  instruments  in  giving  praise 
Juch    use,    then,    appeals    to    be 


something  that  belongs  not  to  sects  or  parlies, 
but  to  human  nature.  It  is  dictated  by  the  best 
of  those  feelings  which  the  God  of  nature  bath 
implanted  in  every  bosom,  prompting  men  to 
employ  with  reverence,  according  to  the  means 
which  they  possess,  all  their  powers  in  express iiu 
gratitude  to  their  Creator.  It  appears  to  be  such 
from  its  existence  prior  to  all  positive  religious 
establishments,  and  from  the  universal  practice 
of  mankind. 

When  we  advance  in  our  inquiry,  and  look 
into  the  covenant  of  peculiarity  introduced  b\ 
the  ministry  of  Moses,  no  mention  is  made  of  in- 
strumental music  among  the  ritual  observance 
of  the  law.  In  a  system  of  merely  temporary 
institution,  it  was  not  deemed  necessary,  by  posi- 
tive enactment,  either  to  forbid  or  to  enjoin  the 
use  of  instrumental  music  in  public  worship.  But 
it  was  left  to  the  will,  and  situation,  and  circum- 
stances of  the  worshippers.  Yet,  while  the  ritual 
law,  in  all  its  branches,  forms  a  majestic  whole, 
guarded  by  most  solemn  sanctions,  instrumental 
music  was  not  found  to  interfere  with  its  rites,  to 
break  its  unity,  or  to  be  inconsistent  with  the 
perfect  pattern  furnished  on  the  mount.  What 
was  the  practice  of  the  church  of  Israel  in  this 
respect,  from  Moses  to  David,  has  not  been  re- 
corded. David,  of  whom  was  to  come,  and  of 
whom,  according  to  the  flesh,  is  come,  Jesus  the 
Mediator  of  the  new  covenant,  was  raised  from 
keeping  his  father's  flock,  to  fill  an  eminent  sta- 
tion, and  to  act  an  important  part,  in  the  great 
scheme  of  Providence.  He  was  richly  endowed 
with  gifts  and  graces  for  maintaining  and  pro- 
moting, in  the  conspicuous  station  to  which  he 
was  exalted,  the  pure  worship  of  the  true  God. 


56 

Many  are  the  prophecies  that  be  uttered,  ai 
was  moved  by  the  Holy  Ghost;  many  are  the 
sublime  strains  of  praise  which  he  poured  forth 
by  the  Spirit;  and  in  some  of  the  most  sublime 
of  these  strains,  when  wrapt  up  in  the  majesty  of 
the  King  he  adored,  he  invites,  exhorts,  enjoins, 
not  merely  the  congregation  then  assembled,  not 
merely  the  twelve  tribes  of  Jacob,  but  all  nations, 
all  the  earth,  to  praise  the  Lord  as  he  did,  with 
psaltery,  and  with  harp,  and  with  Organ,  and 
with  the  voice  of  a  psalm.  Was  his  language 
and  his  conduct  an  infringement  of  the  law  of 
Moses,  so  awfully  hedged  in  on  every  side  by 
curses  and  by  blessings?  Was  not  he  zealous  for 
the  law?  Was  he  compelled  by  any  superior  au- 
thority to  adopt  a  practice  which  he  felt  to  be 
inconsistent  with  the  purity  of  instituted  wor- 
ship ?  Was  he  not  seated  on  the  throne?  Was 
he  not  the  anointed  of  the  Lord  ?  Was  he  not 
animated  by  that  pure  Spirit,  who  alone  kindles 
in  the  pious  heart  the  flame  of  living  praise: 
These  Psalms  of  David  have  ever  been  held  in 
£uch  high  estimation,  not  only  by  Jews  but  by 
Christians,  that  they  have  been  adopted  by  all 
sects  and  parties;  they  have,  by  sovereign  au- 
thority, been  appointed  to  be  sung  by  all  national 
churches.  They  have  been,  and  are  appointed 
by  the  Church  of  Scotland,  to  be  sung  in  congre- 
gations and  in  families.  And  can  it  he  a  sin  to 
sing  them  as  was  done  bj  the  original  cotnpo 
with  the  accompaniment  o(  an  Organ:  If  these 
strains  ever  flowed  warm  and  pure  from  a  human 
heart,  we  cannot  dvuy  that  the\  muM  have  dour 
so  from  the  heart  that  first  conceived  them, 
warmed  by  the  sound  of  his  harp  and  his  Organ, 
under   the    immediate    inspiration  of    the    Holy 


57 

Ghost.     Shall    any  church,    shall    a    Protestant 

church,  condemn  the  singing  of  the  Psalms  of 
David,  as  they  were  sung  by  the  man  according 
to  God's  own  heart? 

But  it  may  be  said,  that  the  church  was  then 
in  an  infant  state,  and  that  now,  become  men, 
we  should  put  away  childish  things.  Let  us  then 
consider  what  we  have  to  learn  from  the  conduct 
of  our  Lord  and  his  apostles.  Now,  we  no  where 
find  the  great  Head  of  the  church,  the  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,  repealing  the  injunctions  pronounced  by 
the  psalmist  David. — Jesus  was  continually  going 
about,  was  often  in  the  temple  and  in  the  syna- 
ues,  often  was  present  at  public  worship,  and 
the  reading  of  the  law.  He  often  administered 
reproof  to  the  Jews  for  their  attention  to  minute 
rites,  and  the  tradition  of  the  fathers,  while  they 
neglected  "  the  weightier  matters  of  judgment, 
mercy  and  faith."'  He  was  zealous  for  the  honour 
of  the  temple,  his  Father's  house;  he  cast  out  the 
money-changers,  and  overturned  their  benches; 
but  he  never  once  opened  his  lips  against  their 
music  and  their  Organs.  Would  Jesus  have  been 
silent  on  this  subject,  had  instrumental  music  been 
a  gross  profanation  of  sacred  things?  Can  we 
suspect  him  of  winking,  through  weakness,  at 
what  he  knew  to  be  a  corruption  of  worship? 
The  apostle  Paul,  in  his  journeyings,  frequented 
ever  the  synagogues.  There  he  met  and  disputed 
with  the  Jews.  Ardent  was  his  zeal  against  the 
beggarly  elements  of  rites  and  ceremonies.  Many 
are  the  important  practical  rules  of  life  that  he 
lias  laid  down;  many  are  the  exhortations  to 
praise  that  he  has  given;  and  is  it  not  strange, 
.  amidst  all  his  warnings,  he  never  warn 


58 

Gentile  converts  against  harps,  and  psalteries, 
and  Organs?  At  Jerusalem,  at  Corinth,  at  Ephc- 
5DS,  at  Athens,  and  at  Rome,  he  must  have  often 
seen  and  heard  instrumental  music  in  worship, 
and  yet  not  a  single  reproof  of  it  has  ever  drop! 
from  his  pen.  If  ever  a  human  being  breathed 
the  pure  spirit  of  his  Master,  it  was  John,  the 
beloved  disciple.  In  his  gospel,  written  towards 
the  evening  of  his  days,  and  in  his  epistles,  wr 
read  not  one  sentence  in  condemnation  of  Or- 
gans. When  we  advance  to  the  book  of  Ref- 
lation, that  deeply  mysterious  book,  which  shuts 
up  the  vision  and  the  prophecy,  we  find  that 
John,  now  fifty  years  after  the  ascension  of  bis 
Lord,  while  he  himself  was  an  exile  in  the  isle  of 
Patmos,  when  the  forms  of  Christian  worship 
must  now  have  been  at  least  as  familiar  to  his 
mind,  as  ever  had  been  the  worship  of  the  tem- 
ple:— when  we  read  this  book,  we  find  not  one, 
but  so  frequent  allusions  made  to  instrumental 
music  in  worship,  as  lead  us  to  infer  on  his  part, 
high  approbation  of  it.  Nay,  in  one  pass 
he  expressly  declares,  that  he  heard  "  harpers 
harping  with  their  harps  in  heaven."  Words 
cannot  be  simpler,  nor  convey  more  plainly  an 
unequivocal  meaning:  and  that  meaning  clearly 
is,  that  instrumental  music  is  at  least  not  incon- 
sistent with  the  purity  of  evangelical  praise.  And 
whatever  value  or  meaning  men  may  now  attach 
to  the  imagery  of  that  prophetic  book,  it  certainly 
-I  high  in  the  estimation  of  the  Westminster 
Divines,  I  adduce  but  oneexample.  In  support 
of  that  paragraph  of  the  2.3d  chapter  of  our  Con- 
fession of  Faith,  which  assorts  the  right  of  Chris- 
tian sovereigns  to  wage  war,  they  give  the  fol- 


0  m, 

lowing  passage  from  the  book  of  Revelation,  a~ 
one  of  their  authorities,  chap.  xvii.  14th  and  16th 
verses,  "  These  shall  make  war  with  the  Lamb, 
and  the  Lamb  shall  overcome  them,  for  he  is 
Lord  of  lords,  and  King  of  kings;  and  they 
that  are  with  him  are  called,  and  chosen,  and 
faithful.  And  the  ten  horns  which  thou  sawest 
upon  the  beast,  these  shall  hate  the  whore,  and 
shall  make  her  desolate  and  naked;  and  shall  eat 
her  flesh,  and  burn  her  with  fire."  Now,  if  the 
bold  imagery  of  this  passage  be — and  what  minis- 
ter or  presbytery  of  our  church  can  deny  it  to  be — 
a  solid  foundation  on  which  to  build  so  important 
a  doctrine,  as  that  of  the  right  of  kings  to  make 
war,  then,  surely,  the  simple  language  of  the  pas- 
sage to  which  I  refer,  clearly  establishes  this  truth, 
that  instrumental  music  accords  perfectly  with 
the  purest  praise  that  we  can  conceive.  For  it  is 
an  eternal  truth,  that  the  Holy  Spirit  of  God  ne- 
ver did,  and  never  could,  suggest  to  the  mind  of 
David,  or  of  John,  or  of  any  created  being,  an 
image  or  a  sound  that  has  the  most  distant  ten- 
dency to  promote  impure  thoughts,  and  to  cor- 
rupt religious  worship.  Here,  then,  is  one  funda- 
mental point  established :  the  use  of  instrumental 
music  in  public  worship  is  not  in  itself  sinful,  is 
not  forbidden  by  the  word  of  God,  but,  on  the 
contrary,  is  expressly  encouraged,  perhaps  en- 
joined, in  the  Old  Testament,  and  is  clearly  au- 
thorized by  the  New. 

Supported  by  this  high  authority,  let  us  next 
trace  what  we  have  to  learn  on  this  subject  from 
the  history  of  the  church.  Was  instrumental 
ic  employed  in  their  worship  by  the  Chris- 
tians of  the  first  age?  There  is  every  reason  to 
believe  that  it  was  not.     No  mention  is  made  of 


GO 

it  bj  the  earliest  historians,*  and  perhaps  no  m 
tion  would  have  been  made,  although  it  had  been 
in  general  use;  because  such  music  in  worship 
was  neither  striking  nor  strange,  either  to  G 
tiles  or  to  Jews.  That  harps  and  Organs  could 
not  thru  be  empl6yed,'|'  must  be  evident  from  the 
severe  and  unremitting  persecution  to  which  the 
church  was  subjected.      How  could  men  think  of 


■  Be  it  so,  that  the  ;;  earliest  historians  do  not  mention  in- 
strumental music  as  employed  by  Christiana  of  the  first 
it  cannot  thence  bo  inferred  thai  tl  riendly  to  the  em- 

ployment of  musical  instruments  in  the  worship  of  God. 
it  will  appear  from  the  authorities  produced  by  the  Prcsbj 
that  when   the   primitive   Christians   had  occasion   to  mention 
instrumental  music,  they  uniformly  expressed  marked  diappro- 
bation  of  it,  and  declared  it  inadmissible  into  Christian  w< 

f  Va^ue  and  general  description  of  this  kind  has  no  mean- 
ing, ;;;i«!  tends  to  mislead.  A  closer  and  more  particular  view 
will  dispel  the  illusion.  The  infant  Christian  church  could 
boast  of  converts  from  among  the  Levites,  who  had  l;e<  n  bii 
or  musical  performers  i>i  the  tem})le.  Barnabas,  we  know, 
from  Acts  iv.  36.  was  aLevitc,  an  opulent  man,  of  a  cultivated 
and  liberal  mind.  His  generous  spirit  is  celebrated  by  St.  Taikr 
in  the  Arts  of  the  Apostles.  u  He  sold  his  land,  and  laid  the 
.  .it  the  apostles'  f«  t/*  When  Paul  returned  to  Jerusa- 
lem, and  u  assayed  to  join  himself  to  the  disciples,  but  they 
were  all  afraid  of  him,  and  believed  not  that  he  was  a  disciple," 
Barnabas  "  took  him,  and  brought  him  to  the  apostles?" — lb- 
was  the  first  Christian  at  Jerusalem  to  befriend  and  patronize 
St.  Paul;  and,  for  a  considerable  time  he  was  the  intimate  com- 
panion, and  zealous  fellow-labourer  of  that  apostle.  This  Bar- 
nabas was,  doubtless,  skilled  in  tlie  music  of  the  temple,  and 
familiarized  and  attached  to  it.   i  conversion 

But  he  abandons  bis  professional  habits,  hi-  favourite  employ- 
ment as  a  Levite,  the  moment  he  becomes  a  Christian.     N 
-  be  pi  actise  or  extol  the  sen  kcei  <>i  hi-  tribe  or  family,  noi 
nomend  the-.-  to  )><■  adopted   b\   Christians  in  their  public 

Dabas,  N\h<>  shared  in  the  (oil-,   and 

dangers,  and  persecutions  of  St.  Paul,  in  (  native 

Country,  in  Pamphylia,  in  Pisidia,  in  Iconit  m,  wai 

i  using  a  psalter}  or  hai  ound  should  betray  him 

to  his   adi  l  lie,  aiw!  mi,  i 

cileable  t" 


61 

employing  harps  and  Organs,  while  they  were 
fleeing  from  city  to  city,  and  hiding  themselves 
in  holes,  and  dens,  and  caves  of  the  earth?  Even 
when,  by  the  conversion  of  Constantine,  a  Chris- 
tian emperor  was  seated  on  the  throne  of  the 
Roman  world,  the  peace  of  the  church  was  far 
from  being  secured.  Wars  and  revolutions,  and 
inundations  of  barbarous  nations,  succeeded  each 
other  with  a  ferocity  and  rapidity,  and  to  an  ex- 
tent, of  which  we,  even  in  these  eventful  times, 
can  form  only  a  very  inadequate  conception. 
Mingled  with  these  wars,  and  promoted  by  them, 
controversy  arose  after  controversy,  and  sect  after 
sect  in  multitudes,  and  directed  the  attention  of 
mankind  to  matters  of  far  more  importance  than 
sacred  music.  Modes  of  worship  were  forgotten, 
amidst  the  keen  contention  for  modes  of  faith. 
Yet,  even  in  defiance  of  the  stern  barbarism  and 
fierce  superstition  of  those  ages,  some  attention 
was  paid  to  psalmody;  for  we  find  that  contro- 
versies on  this  subject,  arose  between  church  and 
church,  and  among  the  members  of  the  same 
church.  But,  as  might  be  expected,  little  pro- 
gress was  made  by  a  people,  whose  throats  were 
more  accustomed  to  the  hideous  cry  of  war,  than 
to  the  soft  notes  of  praise.  About  the  middle  of 
the  eighth  century,  an  era  of  flattering  promise 
seemed  to  begin.  Something  like  order  was  in- 
troduced among  the  Western  nations,  and  some 
faint  gleams  of  light  began  to  dawn,  struck  out 
by  the  vigorous  administration  of  Charles  Mar- 
tel,  of  Pepin,  of  Charlemagne.  While  Pepin, 
in  the  year  757,  was  holding  a  council  of  his 
clergy  at  Compiegne,  for  the  reformation  of  man- 
ners, there  arrived  an  Organ,  sent  him  in  com- 
pliment to  his  high  reputation,  by  that  Constan- 
6 


62 

tine,  emperoB  of  the  East,  who  is  m>  famous  as 
the  iconoclast,  the  fierce  enemy  of  images  in 
churches,  of  convents,  monks,  ami  nuns.  This 
Organ,  the  first,  it  is  said,  that  had  been  seen  in 
Europe,  the  French  king  presented  to  the  church 
of  St.  Corneille,  atCompiegne.  Struck  with  the 
majesty  of  the  instrument,  and  the  solemnity  of 
its  sound,  the  heroic  soul  of  Pepin  thought  he 
could  not  better  employ  it,  than  by  devoting  it 
to  the  service  of  his  God.  Charlemagne,  son 
and  successor  to  Pepin,  continued  the  u^e  of  Or- 
gans, as  we  learn  from  a  poet  of  the  ninth  cen- 
tury, w  ho,  describing  the  effects  of  that  instru- 
ment in  that  age,  says,  that  a  woman  was  so  trans- 
ported with  the  music,  that  she  fainted  and  expired 
under  the  sweetness  of  the  sound.  His  words  are. 

Dulcc  niclos  lantuni  vanas  illudcre  mentcs 
Cseperat,  at  una,  suis  decedens  sensibos,  ipsam 
Ftemina  perdiderit,  vocum  dulcedine  vitam.* 

This  instrument  seems  still  to  have  been  em- 
ployed, and  to  have  spread  at  least  in  fame,  if  not 
in  numbers,  during  the  reign  of  Louis  the  son  of 
Charlemagne.  For  there  exists  a  letter  from  the 
then  Pope,  John  VIII.  in  which,  towards  the  end 
of  the  ninth  century,  is  this  request  to  a  German 
bishop,  "Precamur  autem,  ut  optimum  organum, 
cum  artifice  qui  hoc  moderari  et  facere  ad  omnem 
modulations  eflicaciam  possit,  ad  instructionem 
musics  discipline  aut  deferas,  ant  mittas."  Such 
i!k  -late  of  the  arts  even  in  Italy,  during  the 
ninth   century,    that   not  a  man  could  be    found 


[i  t!.i<  the  kind  »>t'  rapture  that  any  Christian  man  or  wo- 
would  with  to  die  in       Can  it   be  ;<   recommendation  ol 
,.t  they  produced  I  an  effect  In  the  ninth 

-  ■  ntui 


&3 

who  could  make,  or  tune,  or  play  upon  an  org 
And  the  pope  requests,  as  a  singular  favour,  that 
a  man  who  could  do  so,  might  be  sent  to  him 
from  Germany,  for  teaching  the  Italians  music. 
From  the  death  of  Louis,  and  even  during  his 
reign,  the  prospect  of  dawning  reformation  in 
government,  in  science,  and  in  religion,  wos 
darkened  by  a  cloud  that  thickened  ever  deeper 
over  Europe  for  more  than  two  hundred  years, 
during  which  we  learn  nothing  of  instrumental 
music  in  churches.  At  last,  Europe  was  roused 
by  the  papal  summons  to  the  crusades.  Thou- 
sands travelled  for  conquest  to  the  Holy  Land. 
This  fanatical  frenzy  continued  to  drain  Europe 
of  its  inhabitants  for  a  couple  of  centuries. 
Though  most  of  the  crusaders  fell  in  Asia,  yet 
some  were  continually  returning,  and  by  their 
observations  on  what  they  had  seen,  contributed 
not  a  little  to  awaken  the  human  mind  from  the 
lethargy  into  which  it  had  been  sunk.  Then 
began  the  age  of  scholastic  philosophy,  and 
of  scholastic  theology,  which  exercising  the  hu- 
man understanding  on  points  of  the  nicest 
and  most  perplexing  subtilty,  paved  the  way 
for  that  bright  day  of  sound  literature,  and 
pure  religion,  which  now  shines  over  Europe. 
At  this  era,  so  auspicious  to  the  human  race,  it  is 
worthy  of  remark,  that  we  again  find  Organs 
beginning  to  appear,  and  walking  side  by  side 
with  the  other  improvements  of  the  age.  So  far 
then,  were  Organs  from  being  the  invention  of 
the  darkest  ages,  that  it  was  ever  during  periods 
of  dawning  light*  that  they  began  to  be  employ* 


*  Docs  the  author  imagine  that  the  dark  ages  had  not  com- 
menced when  Pepin  and  Charlemagne  flourished  ?    The  best 


64 

ed,  not  by  the  authority  of  a  papal  de<  • 
by  the  dictate  of  pious  feelintr,  prompting  the 
enlightened  mind  to  consecrate  the  labours  of 
genius  to  the  devout  exercise  of  praise.  The  dark 
had  neither  the  head  to  invent,  nor  the  hand 
to  make,  though  they  might  have  had  the  heart 
to  enjoy  them.  During  the  fourteenth  and  fif- 
teenth centuries,  great  were  the  exertions  of  the 
human  soul,  struggling  for  knowledge,  for  liberty, 
for  employment  suited  to  its  powers.  The  pres- 
sure of  superstition  and  of  papal  oppression  coun- 
teracted their  own  ends,  and  through  the  unseen 
workings  of  a  gracious  Providence,  were  over- 
ruled to  bring  on  the  Reformation.  Organs  did 
not  shrink  from  the  scrutinizing  zeal  of  that 
keenly-searching  age;  for  Luther  and  Calvin, 
and  the  other  enlightened  reformers,*  discovered 
in  them  nothing  of  the  idolatry  of  a  corrupted 
church,  which  they  so  nobly  laboured  to  over- 
turn.    And,  indeed,  upon  the  slightest  attention 


historians,  civil  and  ecclesiastical,  are  of  a  different  opinion 
By  them,  the  dark  ages  are  considered  as  comprising  the  se- 
venth, and  continuing  till  the  twelfth  century.     There  might 
be  various  shades  in  the  darkness  of  these  centuries,  but  the 
state  of  literature,  philosophy  and  theology,  during  the  whole 
of  that  dismal  period,  establishes  the  melancholy  truth,  that 
superstition  reigned  triumphant  over  the  minds  of  men.     \\  i- 
of  no  importance  to  the  argument,  whether  this  degradin 
perstition   v  as   in  the  hands  of  the  Greek  or  Roman  chu 
whether  it  was  aided  by  the  skill  of  a  German  or  Italian  artist, 
whether  it  w;is  managed  by  the  influence  of  a  monk. 
emperor,  or  a  pope.     No  man  of  any  observation,  orr<  s< 
will  deny,  that  pious  feeling  may  sometimes  animate  the  heart 
of  the  ignorant  and  superstitious.    Indeed,  unenlightened  pious 
feeling,  hit!'.  t"<>  often,  i><>tli  engendered  and  fostered  supei 

Whether  this  be  8  fair  and  accurate  account  of  the  opinions 
<<[  the  n  form<  rs,  will  appear  from  tin-  quotations  produced  i»_\ 
the  Presbyti  ry,  from  the  works  of  the  reformers,  and  m  their 

own  w< 


65 

by  the  most  superficial  inquirer,  it  must  be  dis- 
covered, that  instrumental  music  forms  no  essen- 
tial part  of  popery;  that  it  is  founded  upon  princi- 
ples widely  different,  indeed,  from  the  ceremonies 
of  the  Church  of  Rome,  because  it  is  consonant 
at  once  to  sound  reason,  and  the  word  of  God. 
Accordingly,  it  was  retained,  and  it  is  still  em- 
ployed, by  all  the  reformed  churches  on  the  conti- 
nent of  Europe.  A  stronger  argument  in  its  fa- 
vour  cannot  be  produced,  except  that  which  I 
have  already  mentioned,  the  sacred  authority  of 
Scripture. — Why  then  has  it  not  been  employed 
by  the  Church  of  Scotland?  The  reasons  arc 
strong,  as  they  were  pressing;  and  in  tracing 
them,  we  shall  discover  the  origin  of  that  preju- 
dice which  still  remains  against  Organs.  What- 
ever our  psalmody  might  have  been  under  the 
popish  power,  we  know,  that  in  the  reforming 
Church  of  Scotland,  it  must  have  been  almost 
annihilated.  Religious  truth  had  to  work  its  way 
amidst  poverty  and  oppression,  in  opposition  to 
the  power  of  an  arbitrary  government,  and  to 
the  persecuting  spirit  of  the  Church  of  Rome. 
There  were  neither  houses  for  the  celebration  of 
religious  ordinances,  nor  ministers  to  preside  in 
the  celebration  of  them,  nor  funds  for  the  sup- 
port of  ministers.  No  wonder,  that  in  these  cir- 
cumstances, every  thing  was  laid  aside,  but  the 
pure  preaching  of  the  Gospel,  and  the  perform- 
ance of  worship  in  the  best  manner,  which  the  ne- 
cessity of  the  times  would  allow.  From  this  state 
of  degradation,  it  was  long  before  our  church 
was  able  to  emerge.  The  doctrines  of  the  Refor- 
mation, it  is  true,  were  generally  embraced;  and 
a  system  of  ecclesiastical  policy,  settled  agreea- 
ble to  the  general  wishes  of  the  country.  Bui 
G* 


66 

the  wealth  of  the  church  had  been  seized  by  the 
landed  proprietors,  and  long  and  arduous  was  the 
contest,  before  even  liberty  of  conscience,  and 
presbyterian  government,  could  be  fixed  upon  a 
permanent  foundation.  The  causes  of  this  con- 
test are  easily  ascertained,  and  its  effects  are 
deeply  felt,  even  in  our  own  day.  The  trouble- 
unavoidable  from  the  factious  spirit  of  a  feudal 
nobility,  under  a  female  popish  reign;  the  bigoted 
partiality  of  a  pedantic  king  for  prelatic  splen- 
dour, which  he  deemed  favourable  to  absolute 
monarchy;  the  mistaken  piety  of  a  virtuous  sove- 
reign, contending,  by  unhallowed  means,  for 
what  he  thought  agreeable  to  the  word  of  God; 
the  hypocritical  ambition  of  a  bold  usurper,  wa- 
ding through  the  dark  fanaticism  of  his  cotempo- 
raries,  to  the  possession  of  a  kingdom  which  he 
affected  to  decline;  the  unprincipled  treason  of  a 
lawful  prince,  restored  to  the  throne  of  his  ances- 
tors, straining  by  force  and  fraud  to  impose  upon 
our  country  a  yoke  which  its  brave  inhabitants 
were  determined  never  to  bear:  the  weak  infa- 
tuation of  a  popish  sovereign,  urging  him  on  not 
merely  to  the  destruction  of  presbytery,  but  of 
the  Reformation; — this  unbroken  series  of  perse- 
cution, maintained  with  such  unrelenting  obsti- 
nacy, through  such  a  number  of  years,  impressed, 
engraved,  wrought  into  the  very  soul  of  our 
presbyteriaps  a  fear,  a  dread,  an  abhorrence,  not 
only  of  popery  and  prelacy,  but  of  every  thing 
that  had  been  connected  with  popish  and  episco- 
pal worship.  Under  these  circumstances,  our 
forefathers  thought,  and  felt,  and  contended  ho- 
nourably, nobly,  as  became  patriots  and  Chris- 
tians. Whal  Scottish  heart  does  not  sympathize 
with  them,   asserting,  at  the  expense  of  fortune 


67 

and  of  life,  those  high  privileges  which  we  now 
enjoy!  What  mind  but  must  approve  of  a  con- 
duct dictated  by  manly  feeling,  by  religious 
principle,  by  the  love  of  all  that  they  held  sacred 
on  earth  and  in  heaven!  Under  the  irritation  to 
which  they  were  subjected,  they  acted  wisely, 
when,  in  obedience  to  that  strong  impulse  of 
what  they  owed  to  moral,  political,  religious  ex- 
istence, they  wrecked,  as  they  did,  their  ven- 
geance on  altars,  crosses,  Organs,  on  every  the 
most  distant  seeming  appendage,  of  a  form  of 
worship  which  they  were  determined  not  to  em- 
brace. And  if  an  infatuated  government  should 
attempt,  in  any  future  age,  a  similar  mode  of  in- 
fringing the  sacred  rights  of  man,  it  is  to  be 
hoped,  that  the  spirit  of  our  ancestors  would  re- 
vive in  their  descendants,  and  animate  them  to 
contend,  as  their  fathers  did,  even  to  the  death, 
for  liberty  of  conscience,  and  for  pure  religion. 

It  is  then  evident,  that  from  the  Reformation 
down  through  the  sixteenth  and  seventeenth  cen- 
turies, it  was  not  possible  for  our  church  to 
pay  much,  if  any  attention  to  sacred  music*  A 
new  era  commenced  at  the  Revolution;  from 
which  period  downwards,  our  Presbyterian  Es- 
tablishment has,  under  a  limited  monarchy,  en- 
joyed all  the  peace  and  protection  which  govern- 
ment can  bestow.  During  a  century  of  uninter- 
rupted prosperity,  it  is  to  be  expected  that  legal 
independence,    and  perfect  security  against  the 


*  The  printed  acts  of  the  Scotch  Parliament,  and  irrefraga- 
ble historical  record,  furnish  the  most  direct  and  positive  evi- 
dence, that  this  averment  has  been  made  precipitately,  and 
without  sufficient  information  :  a  blunder,  which  is  less  pardon- 
able, when  we  consider  the  tone  and  manner  in  which  the  au- 
thor sometimes  speaks  of  others. 


68 

encroachments  of  popery  or  prelacy,  may  haw 
disposed  churchmen  and  laymen  among  us, 
consider  calmly  what  is,  and  what  is  not  essential 
to  those  forms  of  ecclesiastical  government,  and 
to  rise  superior  to  the  weakness  of  rejecting  im- 
provements in  tilings  indifferent,  merely  because 
they  are  employed  by  churches  whose  mode-  of 
worship  we  reject.  This,  in  a  very  considerable 
degree,  has  taken  place.  National  and  religious 
antipathies  are  yielding  to  the  lenient  hand  of 
time.  A  liberality  of  spirit  pervades  our  en- 
lightened church.  Improvements  even  in  our 
psalmody  are  begun,  which  prognosticate  fa- 
vourably for  farther  advancement.  The  tide  of 
human  affairs  is  strong.  The  hand  of  God, 
guiding  the  progress  of  mind,  cannot  be  resisted. 
The  steps  will  be  made,  which  yet  remain,  for 
vindicating  our  church  and  our  country  from  the 
reproach  of  neglecting  one  of  the  best  means, 
that  has  ever  been  devised,  for  the  improvement 
of  sacred  music.  And  shall  Organs,  it  will  be 
asked,  shall  Organs  be  introduced  into  any  of 
our  churches  in  Scotland?  And  why  not?  Have 
not  we,  the  disciples  of  Calvin,*  as  good  a  right 
to  instrumental  music  in  our  worship,  and  all  its 
advantages,  as  his  disciples  in  Geneva,  in  Switzer- 
land, and  in  Germany?  But  has  not  our  church 
been  always  hostile  to  Organs?  Of  such  hostility 
no  evidence  exists,  or  can  exist,  in  a  case  similar 
to  the  introduction  of  the  Organ   into   St.  An- 


•  Though   we    air  not    the   <li><  iplcs  of    C;d\in.    and  will    not 

call  any  wutn  master ;  yet  our  respect  for  In-  opinion  i-  in- 
creased, *bj  considering  the  grounds  of  It:  and  Calvin't  opinion 
»>  decidedly  again*  instrumental  music  being  used  in  tin*  pub* 
lie  worship  of  God,  as  if  shown  afterwards  from  ' 

authority  of  that  great  reformer, 


69 

drew's  church.  For  this  is  a  singular  ca^e;  the 
first  attempt  of  the  kind,  that  was  ever  made  ac- 
cording to  the  pure  principles  of  Presbytery. 
The  people  of  that  congregation,  respectable 
both  from  character  and  from  number,  and 
steady,  as  any  of  their  countrymen,  in  their  at- 
tachment to  the  religion  transmitted  to  them  by 
their  fathers, — the  people  made  the  proposal,  not 
dictated  to  them  by  a  domineering  priest,  not 
imposed  upon  them  by  a  tyrannical  government, 
but  as  their  own  unbiassed  wish,  cherished  among 
them  for  years,  before  they  ever  knew  the  man 
who  is  their  present  minister.  The  Organ  was 
introduced  upon  principles  as  free  from  any  con- 
nexion with  Episcopacy  and  Popery,  as  the  prin- 
ciples of  our  Directory  for  Worship  are,  from 
connexion  with  the  Church  of  England  and  of 
Rome.  Against  such  an  introduction,  our  church 
could  not  possibly  enact  laws,  or  discover  a  hos- 
tile spirit,  because  it  had  never  hitherto  taken 
place.  Laws  are  a  remedy  provided  against  past 
or  present  evils.  The  sagacity  of  legislators  can- 
not pierce  into  futurity,  and  provide  against  what 
may  arise  in  the  course  of  ages.  But,  did  not  an 
Assembly  of  our  church,  in  the  year  1044,  re- 
echo to  the  Scotch  divines  at  Westminster  their 
expressions  of  triumph  over  the  destruction  of 
the  great  Organ  at  St.  Paul's?  Yes;  but  these 
were  times  of  fierce  and  furious  war  against  the 
Church  of  England.  An  invading  army,  who 
have  no  antipathy  to  hedges,  and  villages,  and 
corn  fields,  yet  while  they  are  advancing  to  bat- 
tle, may  level  cruelly  with  the  ground  every  ob- 
stacle that  impedes  their  progress  to  victory.  The 
enemies  which  our  divines  of  that  age  had  chieflj 
at  heart  to  subdue,  was  not  the  helpless,  harmless 


70 

Organ,  but  the  hierarchy  and  Service-book  ol 
sister  kingdom.     And  from  their  success  in  de- 
stroy ing  whaj  they  regarded  as  the  outworks,  they 

might  with  joy  anticipate  their  reducing  to  sub- 
jection the  last  resort  of  the  adversary.  Anti- 
pathy to  Organs  in  this  country,  has  ei 
associated  with  antipathy  to  episcopacy.  Or- 
gans  and  prelates  have,  by  a  surprising  want  of 
discrimination,  been  involved  in  one  common 
condemnation.  But  what  have  Organs  to  do  with 
bishops?  Nothing  more  than  with  John  Calvin, 
John  Knox,  or  .Mr.  Andrew  Melville;  they  are 
never  once  mentioned  in  the  Book  of  Common 
Prayer.  The  canons  of  the  Church  of  England 
never  touch  them.*  Instrumental  music  in  wor- 
ship is  not  the  property  of  any  one  particular 
church  or  kingdom.  It  is  the  hereditary  right  of 
every  church  and  country  under  heaven.  But  has 
not  our  church  an  act  of  security  incorporated 
with  the  Act  of  the  Union  of  the  two  kingdoms; 
and  acts  of  the  General  As>embly  against  inno- 
vation, which  completely  guard  as  against  the 
introduction  of  Organs?  The  Acts  of  Security, 
of  Union,  and  against  Innovation,  had  more  im- 
portant objects  in  view,  with  which  Organs  have 
no  concern.  By  the  Revolution,  the  Act  of  Se- 
curity, and  the  Act  of  Union,  these  have  been 
cured  to  us,  to  our  church,  and  to  our  country; 
all  that  for  which  our  fathers  fought,  and  for 
which  so  many  shed  their  blood.  The  purity 
and  uniformity  of  the  doctrine,  and  discipline,  and 
government,  and  worship  of  the  Church  of  Scot- 
land, are  to  he  preserved  to  the  people  of  Scot- 
land, without  alteration,  to  ;ill  succeeding  gene- 

•  'i'lr   i  :  tlii-  \\  in  be  afterw  eurds  assignee 


n 

rations.  This  is  the  firm  foundation  on  which 
we  stand,  and  shall  stand,  as  long  as  human 
laws,  and  human  power,  and  British  liberty  can 
support  us.  From  this  foundation  it  is  my 
hope,  and  it  shall  be,  through  God,  my  endea- 
vour, that  no  power  of  earth  or  hell,  shall  be 
able  to  move  us.  Here  we  are  guarded  by  high 
and  strong  bulwarks  against  every  hierarchy, 
whether  of  popery  or  episcopacy.  On  this  ground, 
no  liturgy,  or  Service-book,  can,  or  dare  invade 
us.  We  are  an  established  church,  fenced  round 
by  all  that  can  render  us  independent  and  free. 
Our  purity  and  uniformity  in  doctrine,  we  declare 
by  our  subscription  of  our  Confession  of  Faith. 
Our  attachment  to  the  discipline  and  government 
of  the  church,  we  attest  by  our  subscription  of 
one  formula.  Our  purity  and  uniformity  of  wor- 
ship we  prove  by  our  adherence  to  the  rules  laid 
down  in  our  Directory.  To  each,  and  to  all  of 
these,  I  trust,  I  have  uniformly  adhered,  as  faith- 
fully as  my  neighbours.  I  am  not  conscious  of 
a  wish  having  ever  arisen  within  me,  to  depart 
from  any  of  them.  And  in  the  use  of  an  Organ 
in  our  church,  during  public  praise,  I  cannot,  for 
my  life,  after  long  and  serious  attention  to  the 
subject,  discover  even  an  approach  to  any  viola- 
tion, either  of  the  purity  or  uniformity  of  our 
worship.  For  who  will,  or  can  allege,  that  an 
Organ  is  an  innovation  upon  the  great  Object  of 
worship?  We  all,  I  trust,  worship  the  one  God, 
through  the  one  Mediator:  or  upon  the  subject  of 
praise,  for  we  all  sing  the  same  psalms,  and  pa- 
raphrases, in  the  same  language,  all  giving  thanks 
for  the  same  mercies  ;  or  upon  the  posture  of  the 
worshippers,  for  we  all  sit,  as  becomes  true  Pres- 
byterians; or  upon   the  tunes  sung,  for  we  sing 


72 

only  Mich  as  are  in  general  use:  Or  upon  the  offict 
of  the  precentor?  for  he  still  holds  his  rank,  and 
employs  the  commanding  tones  of  the  Organ  for 
guiding  the  voices  of  the  people.  What  then  ifl 
it  ?  It  is  a  help,  a  support  given  to  the  precen- 
tor's voice,  for  enabling  him  more  steadily,  and 
with  more  dignity,  to  guide  the  voice  of  the  con- 
gregation; and  thus  to  preserve,  not  only  uni- 
formity, but  that  unity  of  voice  which  is  so  be- 
coming in  the  public  service,  which  so  pleasingly 
heightens  devout  feelings,  and  prevents  that  dis- 
cord, which  so  easily  distracts  the  attention  of  the 
worshippers.  And  shall  the  addition  of  a  certain 
quantity  of  modulated  sound  to  the  precentor's 
voice,  in  perfect  unison  with  his,  and  therefore 
incapable  of  disturbing  the  current  of  devotion, 
shall  this  be  magnified  into  the  monstrous  crime 
— the  presumption  of  worshipping  God  by  images 
— of  violating  the  Articles  of  the  Union — of  de- 
molishing the  barriers  for  the  security  of  our  re- 
ligion— of  committing  a  deed  of  perjury*  to  or- 


*  We  are  not  a  little  astonished  at  this  very  unguarded  lan- 
guage of  the  reverend  author.  The  word  -perjury,  as  applied  to 
fetm,  never  escaped  the  lips  of  a  single  member  of  Presbytery, 
during  the  whole  of  that  long-  and  spirited  debate  which  took 
place  on  the  7th  October  last :  Even  the  dissentients,  though 
differing  from  their  brethren  in  opinion,  spoke  in  terms  of  the 
highest  approbation,  of  the  handsome  and  delicate  manner  in 
which  the  debate  had  been  conducted.      Indeed,   tlte  1  vaclinos 

with  which  the  Presbytery  received  Dr.  Ritchie'*  declaration, 

that  he  would  not  again  use  an  Organ,  without  the  authority  of 

the  church,  as  narrated  in  their  minutes,  must  convince  every 

thai  thej  would  never  have  granted  such  indulgence 

man  W  horn  they  had  railed  p>  rjun  d .      The)  expressed,  then,  in 

the  course  <>t  the  debate,  what  thej  have  recorded  in  their  an- 

I'tn  nts,  ••  The  great  and  leading  prim  iples  of 

l:  our   ecclesiastical  constitution,   have   been   subscribed  and 

sred  by  ever)  minister  ol  tin-  Presbytery ,  before  God  and 

man,    in   the  m  -  articles  of  their  faith 


dination  vows?  Such  insinuations  against  the 
people  and  the  minister  of  St.  Andrew's  church, 
I  can  express  by  no  other  terms,  than  that  they 
are  a  total  perversion  of  the  meaning  of  words, 
utterly  confounding  the  nature  of  things.  But 
as  all  congregations  will  not,  or  cannot  employ 
Organs,  therefore  the  national  uniformity  is 
broken.  Does  our  national  uniformity  consist  in 
nothing  more  substantial,  than  a  certain  fixed 
quantity  of  sound,  beyond  which  no  congrega- 
tion has  authority  to  pass?  What  is  the  subject 
to  which  this  uniformity  relates?  There  can  be 
no  mode  without  a  subject  to  which  it  adheres. 
And  shall  our  national  uniformity  be  said  merely 
to  relate  to  things  unsubstantial,  ever  varying, 
ever  vanishing,  even  while  the  ear  is  labouring  to 
hear,  and  the  mind  to  catch  them?  To  attach 
perpetuity  of  form  to  things,  from  their  nature  in- 
capable of  uniform  duration,  would  be  a  solemn 


M  Whatever  they  may  be  to  o titers,  they  must  be  a  law  to  them." 
They  quoted  the  questions  put  to  ministers  at  their  ordination : 
1st,  Will  you  practise  and  maintain  the  purity  of  worship,  as 
'presently  practised  in  this  national  church,  and  asserted  in  the 
Act  against  Innovations?  2dly,  Do  you  promise  to  submit 
yourself  quietly  and  meekly  to  the  admonition  of  the  brethren 
of  this  Presbytery;  that  you  will  follow  no  divisive  courses 
from  the  established  worship  and  doctrine  of  this  church  ?  And 
they  quoted  also  the  Formula,  which  every  minister  subscribes, 
in  which  he  owns  "  the  purity  of  the  worship  presently  autho- 
••  rized  and  practised  in  this  church,  and  that  he  will  constantly 
u  adhere  to  the  same,  and  that  he  will  neither  directly  nor  indi- 
"  reclly,  endeavour  the  prejudice  and  subversion  thereof/'  All 
this  was  urged  in  a  general  question,  relative  to  instrumental 
music.  Dr.  Ritchie  was  not  a  party  in  that  question,  and  not 
more  particularized  than  any  other  minister  of  the  Church  of 
Scotland.  Why,  then,  does  Dr.  Ritchie  insinuate,  that  any  of 
the  brethren  called  him  perjured?  Why  do  his  anonymous  ad- 
vocates presume,  in  the  spirit  of  falsehood  and  defamation,  to 
publish  to  the  world,  that  Dr.  Portcous  and  Mr.  Lapslie  "  wan- 
••  I only  cliargod  Dr.  Ritchie  witli  the  awful  crime  of  perjury 


n 

mocker y  of  our  venerable  legislators.  Ila\e  all 
congregations,  or  can  all  congregations,  have  an 
equal  number  of  voices,  the  same  heighth,  or 
depth,  or  force  of  sound,  for  expressing  them- 
selves in  praise?  All  congregations  have  not 
bands  of  singers  to  guide  them  in  praise.  But 
do  these  things,  the  result  of  situations  and  of 
circumstances,  which  no  human  law  can  prevent, 
break  in  upon  the  national  uniformity  of  wor- 
ship ?  No  more  than  the  difference  between  a 
plain  untutored  country  congregation,  where  al- 
most every  man  and  every  woman  sing  honestly 
their  own  tune,  and  the  well-regulated  harmony 
of  a  Glasgow  kirk,  guided  by  a  highly  cultivated 
band.  And  there  is  not  an  abuse  of  which  Organs 
are  susceptible,  nor  an  objection  to  which  they 
are  liable,  nor  an  improper  influence  which  they 
may  be  supposed  likely  to  produce,  which  may 
not,  in  an  equal  degree,  be  ascribed  to  a  band  of 
human  singers,  which  is  literally  an  Organ,  com- 
posed of  the  throats  of  moral  agents,  converting 
themselves  for  hire  into  pipes  and  whistles.  But 
it  is  not  against  these  petty  distinctions,  which 
are  unavoidable  in  every  large  society,  when 
French  equality*  is  not  the  order  of  the  day;  it 
is  not  against  these  that  the  wisdom  of  our  church 
and  state  have  so  anxiously  guarded  us,  but 
against  the  hierarchy  and  the  Service-book.  From 
inattention  to  this,  combined  with  the  distracted 


•  We  air  at  a  loss  to  know  what  is  meruit  to  be  insinuated  by 
the  p]  m  h  equality.'.'     The  author  must  certainly  1>.' 

ble,  that  Presbyterian   parity,  ;nnl  the  uniformity  of  the 
public  worship  of  God,  established  by  civil  and  eccli 
statutes,  and  lanctioned  by  immemorial  usage  in  tin- 
arc  not  to  bo  juparaged  or  ridiculed  03  le  cant  ex- 
dicfc                    rohitionary  mania  of  French  infidels 


76 

state  of  the  country  in  former  times,  has  a; 
the  prejudice  against  Organs  ;  while  the  mistaken 
idea  has  been  cherished,  that  they  form  a  compo- 
nent part  of  Episcopacy.  That  this  is  mistake 
and  prejudice,  is  proved  beyond  all  possibility  of 
doubt,  by  the  conduct  of  the  most  purely  Cal- 
vinistic,  and  most  strictly  Presbyterian  churches 
on  the  continent.  Not  free,  I  am  disposed  to 
presume,  from  the  influence  of  this  mistake,  the 
respondents  seem  never  to  have  inquired  what 
was  done  in  St.  Andrew's  church.  They  con- 
jure up  to  themselves  some  horrid  prostitution  of 
sacred  things,  and  then  fight  against  it,  as,  pro 
aris  et  focis,  wielding  their  arms  against  a  sha- 
dow. What  took  place  in  our  church  is  literally 
this.  The  precentor,  as  usual,  was  in  his  place. 
The  Organ  joined  him,  and  so  did  the  congre- 
gation. The  Organ  never  struck  a  note  but  at 
the  same  moment  with  the  precentor,  it  pro- 
ceeded along  with  him,  pausing  from  line  to  line, 
in  the  ordinary  method,  maintaining  throughout 
the  whole,  that  grave  melody  which  our  Direc- 
tory enjoins;  and  with  him  it  ceased.  Who  can 
discover  here  the  monstrous  profanation  of  wor- 
shipping God  by  images  ?  Another  mistake, 
which,  in  my  apprehension,  runs  through  the 
opinion  maintained  by  the  respondents,  is,  that 
we,  the  minister  and  congregation  of  St.  An- 
drew's church,  were  assuming  to  ourselves  the 
sovereign  prerogative  of  enacting  a  law  for  the 
whole  church,  for  obtruding  Organs  upon  all  the 
congregations  in  Scotland.  This  surely  is  a 
gigantic  idea ;  such  a  thought  never  arose  in  our 
minds.  We  exercised  what  we  believed  to  be  our 
sacred  private  right,  and  we  will  ever  allow  to 
others  the  free  exercise  of  theirs.     Acting  uodei 


76 

the  influence  of  these,  which  I  n 
apprehensions  of  the  subject,  the  respondents 
have  contended  strongly  against  Episcop b 
which  I  have  never  undertaken  to  defend.  They 
have  pas&ed  a  sentence,  which  in  my  apprehen- 
sion, goes  far  beyond  the  object  which  they  meant 
to  condemn.  For  that  cannot  be  illegal,  against 
which  no  law  exists,  or  could  exist.  That  can- 
not violate,  which  touches  not  the  constitu- 
tion. That  cannot  be  against  the  law  of  God. 
which  is  authorized  by  his  Word.  That  cannot 
be  against  the  spirit  and  the  genius  of  our  church. 
which  she  habitually  recommends  to  the  people, 
by  her  appointment  of  the  singing  of  L)avidrs 
Psalms.  Before  declaring  her  prohibition  ol 
Organs,  it  is  incumbent  on  the  church  to  ex- 
punge from  the  sacred  records  those  passages 
which  seem  clearly  to  recommend  the  use  of  in- 
struments in  worship;  that  thus  the  worshippers 
may  be  delivered  from  the  inconsistency  of  pro- 
mising, and  exhorting  each  other  to  do,  what  in 
their  hearts  they  resolve  not,  and  by  the  church 
are  forbidden,  to  perform. 

Such  being  the  principles  and  sentiments  which 
I  had  long  entertained  with  regard  to  instrumental 
music,  I  felt  myself  fully  warranted  to  concur  with 
my  people,  in  their  scheme  of  erecting  an  Organ 
in  St.  Andrew's  church.  With  this  view,  appli- 
cation was,  in  autumn,  1S06,  made  to  the  LOrd 
Provost,  magistrates,  and  council,  not  for  It  art 
to  erect  an  Organ  in  the  church — It  became  us. 
not  to  present  a  request,  which  the  civil  power 
had  not  the  right  to  grant.  All  matters  of  wor- 
ship belong  exclusively  to  the  ecclesiastical  juris- 
diction— The  requesl  was,  that  the  Lord  Pro* 
vost,  and  magistrates,  and  council,  as  our  heri- 


77 

tors,  would  allow  certain  alterations  in  certain 
seats,  that  there  might  be  room  for  setting  up  an 
Organ.  The  petitioners,  at  the  same  time,  bind- 
ing themselves  to  defray  the  expense,  and  to 
make  good  all  damages  that  might  be  supposed, 
but  which  they  apprehended  not  to  arise  from  the 
introduction  of  the  Organ.  This  request,  the 
magistrates,  upon  principles  which  to  them 
seemed  just,  thought  proper  to  refuse.  The  pe- 
titioners submitted,  as  became  them,  to  the  civil 
power,  and  never  presumed  to  think  of  touching 
the  seats  in  question.  In  this  situation  the  busi- 
ness lay,  until  in  the  beginning  of  June  last,  it  was 
resolved,  by  the  minister  and  a  few  heads  of  fami- 
lies, to  have  a  meeting  one  evening  in  the  week, 
of  such  members  of  the  congregation  as  might 
find  it  convenient  to  attend  in  church,  for  the 
purpose  of  improving  themselves  in  sacred  music. 
This  practice,  I  believe,  existed  in  other  churches 
of  this  city,  and  the  idea  was  borrowed  from  our 
neighbours.  After  finding  that  this  proposal  was 
relished  by  a  number  of  the  hearers,  and  that  they 
gave  regular  attendance,  it  was  next  proposed  by 
some  of  the  attendants,  to  introduce  a  Chamber 
Organ,  as  a  help  to  the  precentor,  for  guiding  the 
voices  of  the  singers.  For  such  an  introduction, 
it  never  once  occurred  to  us,  that  leave  should  be 
obtained  from  either  the  civil  or  ecclesiastical 
power.  This  was  a  matter  of  merely  private  ac- 
commodation. We  did  not  meddle  with  the 
seats; — we  made  no  alterations  whatever,  on  any 
part  of  the  church.  The  Organ  was  introduced, 
was  employed  regularly  one  evening  in  the  week* 
and  the  use  of  it  never  did,  as  far  as  I  know,  ex- 
cite even  the  appearance  of  a  tendency  to  dis- 
turbance.    We  walked  to  and  from   church  in 


78 

peace  and  quietness.  Nobody  minded  us;  the) 
\sere  better  employed  in  attending  to  their  own 
affairs.  While  we  were  thus  meeting  together, 
as  members  of  one  family,  it  was  suggested,  that 
our  edification  might  be  promoted,  and  our  im- 
provement surely  not  retarded,  by  concluding 
our  meeting  with  family  worship.  This  was 
done;  and  in  praise  we  employed  the  Organ. 
The  people  present  were  highly  gratified,  and 
became  loud  and  urgent  in  their  requests  for  the 
use  of  that  instrument  in  public  worship.  The 
resolution  to  employ  it  was  adopted.  But  before 
our  resolution  was  put  in  practice,  I  received 
from  the  Lord  Provost  of  Glasgow,  the  official 
letter  of  the  22d  of  August,  which  is  now  in  the 
Presbytery  record.  This  letter  had  not  the  effect 
of  making  me  shrink  one  moment  from  w  hat  I 
believe  to  be  my  right,  from  the  privilege  of  di- 
recting all  that  concerns  public  worship  in  the 
parish  church  of  which  I  am  minister,  inde- 
pendently of  the  civil  power.  1  did  not  betray 
the  cause  of  the  church,  in  yielding  up  to  the 
civil  magistrate,  what  can  only  fall  under  the 
jurisdiction  of  my  ecclesiastical  superiors.  1 
maintained  the  privileges  of  this  court,  and  1  am 
now  in  my  proper  place,  accounting  for  my  con- 
duct to  the  Presbytery  of  which  I  am  a  member. 
The  Organ  was  employed  in  St.  Andrew's 
church,  in  public  worship,  on  the  23d  of  August 
No  explosion  took  place.  No  damage 
ensued.  AH  was  done  decently,  and  in  order. 
.According  to  my  promise,  in  my  answer  to  the 
Lord  Provost,  1  embraced  the  first  opportunity 
of  laying  his  lordship's  letter  before  a  number  of 
the  gentlemen,  v  i  <-  have  commonly  acted  with 
me    in    this    matter.     They   all    with   one   voice 


79 

agreed,  that  his  lordship's  terms  were  fair,  were 
just,  were  what  they  expected;  and  nothing  more 
than  what,  upon  a  former  occasion,  in  conver- 
sation with  the  magistrates  of  the  former  year, 
they  had  engaged  to  perform.  Three  gentlemen 
were  named  for  waiting  upon  the  Lord  Provost, 
and  giving  him  the  assurance  which  he  required. 
Here,  surely,  there  was  no  mark  of  disrespect  to 
the  civil  power.  This  our  meeting  was  on  the 
26th  of  August;  and  on  that  day  I  received  the 
Lord  Provost's  second  letter,  conveying  the  of- 
ficial information,  in  full  form,  that  he  had  taken 
the  legal  protest  against  us,  which  we  never 
doubted  would  take  place;  and  giving  notice 
that  he  was  to  lay  the  whole  matter  before  the 
Presbytery.  Wishing,  as  from  the  beginning  I 
had  done,  that  every  thing  might  be  avoided  that 
might  have  the  most  distant  appearance  of  an 
interference  between  the  civil  and  ecclesiastical 
jurisdiction;  and  fully  persuaded,  that  informa- 
tion not  only  might,  but  certainly  would  be 
lodged  in  some  other  way ; — for  how  could  a  deed 
be  concealed,  done  in  a  parish  church,  in  the 
face  of  a  congregation,  during  public  worship  on 
the  Lord's  day? — with  this  wish,  and  under  this 
persuasion,  I  sent  two  gentlemen  twice  in  one 
day,  to  request  of  the  Lord  Provost  that  the  civil 
power  might  no  more  be  seen  in  this  business, 
because  whatever  opinion  the  Presbytery  might 
form  of  the  case,  they  might,  perhaps,  be  jea- 
lous* of  an  encroachment  on  the  rights  of  a  mi- 


■  It  would  have  been  desirable  that  the  author  of  the  State- 
ment had.  in  this  request  to  the  Lord  Provost,  been  a  little 
more  delicate  in  bringing  forward  the  reverend  Presbytery  to 
the  view  of  the  public.  He  seems  to  have  been  all  along  pe- 
culiarly attentive  to  their  ease  and  conveniens,  for  never  so 


80 

nister,  since  to  them  belongs,  exclusively,  the 
judgment  in  such  cases,  and  the  privilege  of  call- 
ing in  the  civil  power  in  aid  of  their  judgment, 
against  refr'actory  and  obstinate  ministers.     On 

this  principle,  I  acted  from  the  most  sincere  re- 
spect  for  both  brandies  of  the  constitution.  The 
information  was  lodged;  and  when  the  Pres- 
bytery was  about  to  enter  on  its  discussion,  I,  not 
knowing  in  what  light  the  civil  power  was  to  be 
regarded,  craved  a  delay,  which  the  Presbytery 
obligingly  granted.  At  next  meeting  the  busi- 
ness received  so  very  unexpected  a  direction,  and 
was  hurried  on  by  such  a  storm  of  zeal,  that  I 
have  no  desire  now  to  reagitate  the  subject.  The 
result  stands  upon  record.  And  it  is  my  hope, 
that  what  I  have  now  submitted,  shall  also  be 
committed  to  record,  that  thus  both  sides  of  the 
question  may  be  subjected  to  the  review  of  future 
generations.  And  whatever  opinion  men  may 
form  of  the  merits  of  either  side,  I  trust,  that 
every  insinuation  against  the  loyalty  to  magis- 
trates and  to  the  church,  of  us  who  are  advoc 
for  an  Organ,  will  be  found  groundless.  We,  the 
minister,  and  elders,  and  congregation  of  St. 
Andrew's  church,  are  loyal  citiiens.  We  honour 
and  we  obey  our  magistrates.  We  vie  with  our 
fellow-citizens  in  our  exertions  to  maintain  the 
civil  power  in  that  dignified  respectability  which 
the  interests  of  good  order  in  Glasgow  require. 
We  are  steady  in  our  attachment  to  our  ecclesi- 
astical establishment,  as  transmitted  to  us  by  our 


much  as  once  did  li<-  consult  them  In  tlu>  affair  of  I 

but  kept  all  his  plant  and  operations  concerning  ii  a  profound 

lecret  from  them.     Wh\  then  dors  he  now  expate  tin   I 

ry,   by  holding  tlicni  up   as  a  bugbear  to  hinder  the  civil 
Irate  from  doing  his  boumk'ii  duty. 


81 

fathers,  and  secured  to  us  by  the  law  of  the  land, 
hi  what  we  have  done,  on  the  subject  of  an  Or- 
gan, we  have  had  ever  in  view  our  own  edifi- 
cation, without  even  the  imagination  of  doing 
injury  to  an  individual,  or  being  disloyal  either 
to  church  or  state.  We  have  acted  as  a  united 
people;  not  a  voice  from  among  us  having  been 
raised  against  those  who  have  stood  most  forward 
in  the  business.*  The  subscribers  to  the  petition, 
had  the  concurrence  and  the  good  wishes  of  the 
whole  people  for  success  in  their  scheme.  The 
example  is  singular,  of  a  minister,  and  elders,  and 
people,  uniting  as  one  man,  for  promoting  their 
own  improvement  in  sacred  music,  by  means 
which  they  deemed  fair,  and  legal,  and  honour- 
able, while  yet,  by  those  to  whom  they  were 
looking  up  for  encouragement,  they  have  been 
exhibited  to  the  world,  as  violating  the  law  both 
of  the  church  and  of  the  state.  Feeling,  as  we 
do,  the  harshness  of  the  sentence  pronounced 
against  us,  we  have  confidence  that  the  judgment 
of  a  candid  public  will  be,  that  guilt  has  been 
imputed,  where  there  was  no  crime,  and  that  we 
have  become  the  victims  of  a  prejudice  which  we 
wished  to  remove, — the  prejudice,  that  instru- 
mental music  in  public  worship  is  inseparably 
connected  with  Popery,  and  with  Prelacy.  In 
combining  my  efforts  for  this  end,  with  those  of 
my  congregation,  I  have  made  no  sacrifice  of 
judgment,    or  even  of  opinion;  for  I  have  acted 


We  have  never  heard  that  there  was  a  meeting  either  of 
the  session  or  congregation  at  large,  to  approve  or  disapprove 
of  the  measures  adopted  by  their  musical  committee.  Ol* 
course,  the  congregation  never  had  it  in  their  power  to  ltIvc 
their  voice  in  a  formal  constitutional  manner,  either  for,  or 
against  those,  who  stood  most  forward  in  the  bugiiN 


82 

from  the  lull  approbation  of  my  own  mind,  con- 
firmed by  the  judgment  and  the  practice  of  men 
of  the  most  cultivated  understandings,  and  of  the 
purest  hearts,  that  have  ever  adorned  the  re- 
formed churches.  And  though,  on  this  occasion, 
no  sacrifice  has  been  required  of  me,  for  com- 
plying with  the  wishes  of  my  hearers,  yet  I  am 
persuaded  they  will  consider  what  is  past,  as  a 
pledge  on  my  part,  that,  if  future  circumstances 
should  require  it,  in  whatever  can  contribute  to 
their  liberal  enjoyment,  as  well  as  to  their  re- 
ligious improvement,  no  sacrifice  shall  be  refused 
by  me  to  my  people,  to  whom  my  labours  and 
my  life  are  devoted. 

(Signed)  Will.  Ritchie. 

Glasgow,  6th  January,  1808. 


Minutes  of  Presbytery. 

February  3d.  1808. 

On  reading  the  minutes  of  last  meeting,  the 
Presbytery  appoint  Dr.  Porteous,  Dr.  Balfour, 
Mr.  Lapslie,  and  Mr.  M'Lean,  a  committee  to 
prepare  an  answer  to  the  paper  given  in  by  Dr. 
Ritchie  at  last  meeting.  Dr.  Porteous  to  be 
convener. 

March  30th,  1808. 

The  committee  appointed  to  draw  up  answers 
to  the  Statement  of  \)\\  Ritchie,  gave  in  said  an- 
swers, which  being  read  and  approved  of,  with- 
out ■  vote,  were  ordered  to  be  recorded;  which 
Mr.  Lapslie  and  Mx.  M'Lean  were  ordered  t< 
done. 


83 


Answers  by  the  Committee  for  the  Presbytery  of 
Glasgow,  to  Dr.  Ritchie' s  Statement. 

Your  committee,  in  obedience  to  the  appoint- 
ment of  the  reverend  Presbytery  of  Glasgow,  beg 
leave  to  submit  the  following  answer  to  a  paper 
given  in  to  the  Presbytery,  by  the  Rev.  Dr. 
Ritchie,  on  the  sixth  day  of  January  last,  entitled, 
"  Statement  of  the  grounds  on  which  the  minis- 
"  ter  of  St.  Andrew's  church  thinks  himself  vin- 
"  dicated  in  permitting,  and  the  facts  connected 
11  with  hi>  employing  an  Organ  in  public  worship, 
M  on  the  Lord's  Day." 

Your  committee  beg  leave  to  preface  their 
answer  with  the  following  request :  That  it  may 
be  explicitly  understood  by  all  parties,  as  a  fixed 
principle,  that  in  this  discussion  between  our 
brother  and  us,  we  are  to  avoid  all  general  specu- 
lation about  what  might,  or  might  not  be,  a  pro- 
per form  of  religious  worship,  to  be  adopted  by 
an  infant  church,  met  for  the  first  time,  to  model 
its  establishment.  For  the  minister  of  St.  An- 
drew's church  and  his  congregation,  and  we,  your 
committee,  either  in  the  character  of  teachers,  or 
in  the  capacity  of  hearers,  are  defined  constituent 
parts  of  the  established  Presbyterian  Church  of 
Scotland,  and  each  of  us  have  pledgedtlourselves 
to  defend  its  doctrine,  government,  discipline, 
and  worship,  as  contained  and  specified  in  its 
standards,  and  confirmed  by  the  public  law  of 
the  land. 

If  that  paper,  which  we  are  appointed  to  an- 
swer, had  been  •written  by  a  man  entirely  un- 
acquainted with  our  sacred  records,  and  only 
dictated  by  those  feelings,  which,  as  the  statement 
expressed)  itself,  "  the  God  of  nature  hath  im- 


84 

:-  planted  in  every  bosom,  abstract  from  all  po- 
"  sitivc  religious  establishments :"  or,  had  it  been 
written  by  a  professed  Episcopalian,  inclined  by 

education,  and  influenced  by  habit,  to  prefer  the 
pomp  of  cathedral  worship,  to  the  simplicity  of 
the  primitive  times  of  the  church  of  Christ:  or, 
had  it  even  been  written  i>\  a  Congregationalism 
who  conceives  that  the  will  of  his  particular  flock 
is  a  law  paramount  to  all  confessions,  or  liturgies, 
or  directories;  your  committee,  in  their  answers, 
would  have  considered  themselves  as  called  on, 
to  have  adopted  a  very  different  mode  of  reason- 
ing. But  let  it  be  remembered,  that  our  answer 
is  directed  to  that  statement  given  in  by  the  mi- 
nister of  St.  Andrew's  church,  for  himself  and 
his  congregation,  component  pints  of  the  esta- 
blished Presbyterian  Church  of  Scotland:  And 
while  we  shall  allow  the  most  liberal  toleration 
in  matters  of  public  worship,  to  other  bodies  of 
professing  Christians,  in  this  part  of  the  United 
Kingdom;  in  no  shape  whatever,  do  we  consi- 
der ourselves  at  liberty  to  infringe  the  Presby- 
terian Establishment  of  our  country,  as  con- 
tained in  her  standards,  making  a  part  of  the 
public  law  of  the  land,  acquiesced  in  for  a  hun- 
dred and  twenty  years,  often  recalled  to  our 
memory  by  the  solemn  decisions  of  our  church, 
and  sanctioned  by  the  decided  approbation  and 
veneration  of  the  people  of  Scotland.  Holding 
it,  there  lore,  as  an  undoubted  principle,  that  nei- 
ther the  reverend  Presbytery,  nor  the  minister  of 

St.  Andrew^  church,    are   entitled    to  legislate   a 
new  form  of  worship  for  their  wspective  con 
nations,  hut  that  the}  are  expressly  bound  to  de- 
fend and  practise  that  form  which  was  demanded 
by  bur  forefather-  in  the  Claim  of  Rights,  estab- 


85 

lished  at  the  Revolution,  and  declared  to  be  un- 
alterable by  the  Act  of  Security  and  treaty  of 
Union, — your  committee  (latter  themselves  that 
they  shall  be  able  to  convince  the  minister  of  St. 
Andrew's  church,  and  the  world  at  large,  that 
the  judgment  passed  on  the  7th  October  last  by 
the  Presbytery  of  Glasgow,  was  agreeable  to  the 
law  of  the  land,  and  to  the  law  and  constitution 
of  this  our  national  church.  And  should  we,  in 
our  reasoning,  use  any  language  which  may 
seem  to  a  stranger,  to  condemn  any  practice  of 
public  worship  used  by  other  churches  of  Christ, 
let  it  be  remembered  that  it  is  our  object  solely  to 
defend  our  own  practice:  and  whatever  argu- 
ment of  defence  may  assume  the  appearance  of 
attack,  it  ariseth  from  the  scantiness  of  language 
to  express  our  ideas,  not  from  any  desire  on  our 
part  to  hurt  the  feelings  of  our  Christian  neigh- 
bours. 

Our  brother  commenceth  his  statement  by 
observing,  that  a  wish  had  been  entertained  for 
more  than  thirty  years,  to  have  an  Organ  erected 
and  employed  in  public  worship  in  St.  Andrew's 
church.  Though  this  may  be  literally  true,  it 
can  be  of  no  importance  whatever,  when  judging 
upon  the  legality,  or  even  expediency  of  this 
measure.  During  that  period,  it  is  well  known, 
this  congregation  have  had  two  very  respectable 
ministers,  who  were  as  desirous  of  pleasing  their 
people,  as  faithful  Presbyterian  ministers  ought 
to  be.  They  were  men  of  wisdom  and  prudence, 
as  well  as  of  taste.  Neither  of  these  ever  at- 
tempted to  bring  forward  a  measure  of  this  kind. 
Ought  not  this  circumstance  to  have  put  our  bro- 
ther on  his  guard,  especially  if  he  be  well  in- 
formed, when  he  savs,  that  for  thirty  ycar<  this 
S 


Ltiou  have  wished  for  an  Organ. 
wish  of -.mix  a  tion  ought  to  have  no  w. 

whatever,  to  induce  the  minister  of  that  con_ 

ion  to  infringe  the  fundamental  laws  and  con- 
stitution of  our  established  church,  to  which  both 
minister  and  people  have  covenanted  to  adh< 
and  which  they  have  promised  to  obey.  The 
simple  wish  of  a  congregation  might  be  an  argu- 
ment to  influence  the  ministers  of  English  Inde- 
pendents, or  Scotch  Seceders;  but  in  our  Esta- 
blished Presbyterian  Church,  where  the  direction 
and  superintendence  of  the  doctrine,  worship, 
discipline,  and  government,  are  committed  to 
ministers  and  elders,  (the  ofiicc-bcarers  of  our 
church  acting  in  their  legislative  and  judicial 
capacity,)  such  an  argument  seems  improper,  and 
is  most  certainly  unconstitutional.  For  our  bro- 
ther, therefore,  to  have  so  unprecedentedly  given 
ear  to  the  wishes  of  his  congregation,  and  has- 
tened to  obtain  for  them  their  favourite  object, 
without  even  consulting  the  Presbytery  of  Glas- 

in  their  official  capacity,  we  do  not  trei 
the  rules  of  charity  and  politeness,  when  we  B 

.  (ui  hi>  part  at  least,  bordering  upon  some- 
thing like  unconstitutional  conduct.  Had  the 
Rev.  Presbytery  of  Glasgow  carried  their  opi- 
nion no  higher  than  the  dissentients  did,  on  the 
7th  of  October  last,  who  declared  the  introduc- 
tion of  instrumental  music  unauthorised  and  incx- 
\  our  committee  would  -till  be  justified  in 
saying  what  thej  have  now  said,  relative  to  the 

duct  of  our  brother,  when  he  talks  of  having 

yielded  to  die  wish  of  his  con  u     Your 

committee  are  afraid,  thai  this  strong  desire  to 

gadon,  nm\  have  imperceptibly 

warped  our  brother's  better  judgment,  and  in- 


87 

Juccd  him  to  view  that  opposition  which  he  has 
met  with  from  the  Presbytery  of  Glasgow  to  his 
favourite  measure,  as  an  opposition  founded 
merely  in  prejudice,  and  to  affirm  such  things  in 
vindication  of  himself  and  his  congregation,  in 
that  statement  which  he  gave  in,  and  is  now  upon 
record,  which  fair  logical  reasoning  will  not  sup- 
port. 

Considering  the  polite  and  candid  manner  in 
which  the  Presbytery  of  Glasgow  accepted  at 
once  of  the  declaration  of  our  brother,  that  he 
would  not  again  use  the  Organ  without  the  au- 
thority of  the  church,  and  the  indulgent  spirit 
which  they  manifested,  in  granting  him  liberty 
to  give  in  an  explanation  after  the  matter  was 
decided,  and  even  recording  the  whole  of  his  ar- 
gument in  behalf  of  his  opinion,  your  committee 
did  not  expect  to  have  heard  of  such  expressions 
as  these  :  "  The  discussion  was  hurried  on  with 
"  such  a  storm  of  zeal. — Such  insinuations  against 
"  the  people  and  the  minister  of  St.  Andrew's 
"  church,  I  can  express  by  no  other  terms,  than 
"  that  they  are  a  total  perversion  of  the  meaning 
"  of  words,  utterly  confounding  the  nature  of 
M  things. — Not  free  from  the  influence  of  this 
"  mistake,  I  am  disposed  to  presume,  the  respon- 
"  dents"  (he  must  mean  the  Rev.  Presbyteiy,  be- 
cause they  had  adopted  the  paper  of  the  respon- 
dents, prior  to  the  giving  in  of  his  statement) 
"  seem  never  to  have  inquired  what  was  done  in 
"  St.  Andrew's  church;  they  conjure  up  to  them- 
il  selves  some  horrid  prostitution  of  sacred  things, 
"  and  then  fight  against  it,  as,  pro  aris  et  focis, 
"  wielding  their  arms  against  a  shadow." — Your 
committee  are  disposed  to  forgive  irritation  even 
in  a  liberal,   philosophical,   and  Christian  mind, 


i  disappointed  in  a  favourite  m<  -  veu 

the  best  of  human  characters  are  not  free  from 
imperfections,  and  to  the  imperfections  incident 
to  humanity,  they   are  disposed  to  ascribe 

uarded  language  used  by  the  minister  of  St. 
Andrew's  church,    in    hi<    statement      Peri: 
your  committee  would  be  justified  in  thai 

in  point  of  form,  our  brother  had  no  legal  title  to 
have  uttered  one  syllable  after  our  sentence  was 
pronounced.     He  declined  voting  in  the  cai 
He  dissented  not  from  the  judgment,  of  the  harsh- 
ness of  which  he  now  complains.     And  there; 
had  the  Presbytery  adhered  strictly  to  ecclesias- 
tical form,  our  brother  could  not  have  been  in- 
dulged in  having*  recorded  his  laboured  dell 
of  1  lis  favourite   opinion:    nor   would   we,  your 
committee,  have  now  been  called  upon  to  answer 
a  voluminous  statement,  comprehending  in  some 
parts  of  it,   rather  an  attack  upon  the  judgment 
of  the  Presbytery,  than  merely  an  indulged  ex- 
planation of  his  own  conduct  upon  the  twenty- 
third  of  August  last. 

The  world,  to  which  our  brother  appeals,  shall 
judge  between  u<. 

We  find  some  difficulty  in  ascertaining  exactly 
the  arrangement  adopted  by  our  brother  in  this 
statement;  but  after  the  most  attentive  considera- 
tion on  our  part,  we  are  inclined  to  believe  that 
it  resolves  itself  into  the  five  following  heads, 
which  we  shall  analyze  and  answer  in  order. 

I.  "  That  the  use  of  instrumental  music  in 
"  public  worship  i^  not  forbidden  by  the  word  of 
11  God,  but,  on  the  contrary,  18  expressly  eueou- 
"  raged,  perhaps  enjoined,  in  the  Old  Testament, 
"  and  is  clear!)  authorized  by  the  New." 

In  his  reasoning  to  support  this  hi-  first  c< 


89 

elusion,  our  brother  sets  out  by  observing,  that 
"  there  is  but  one  fixed  and  infallible  standard 
,;  for  all  that  regards  public  worship.  Whatever 
M  is  not  agreeable  to,  or  founded  on  the  word  of 
"  God,  ought  to  have  no  place  in  the  worship  of 
,;  Christians."  To  this  position  we  most  heartily 
ut.  It  is  with  particular  pleasure  that  we  ob- 
serve this  great  Protestant  principle,  the  foun- 
dation of  our  reformation  from  Popery,  and  by 
which  the  door  is  for  ever  shut  against  all  the 
will-worship  and  superstitious  rites  of  the  Church 
of  Rome,  recognized  and  gloried  in  by  the  au- 
thor of  the  Statement. 

With  respect  to  his  reasoning  adjected  to  this 
fundamental  principle,  namely,  that  before  the 
•.riving  of  the  law,  instrumental  music  was  em- 
ployed by  the  twelve  tribes  of  Israel,  and  that 
when  we  "  look  into  the  covenant  of  peculiarity 
;;  introduced  by  the  ministry  of  Mose«,  no  men- 
•;  tion  is  made  of  instrumental  music  among  the 
•;  ritual  observances  of  the  law;" — we  dare  not 
give  such  positive  assent.  For  a  great  variety 
of  opinions  has  been  entertained  by  learned  men. 
as  to  the  precise  period  when  instrumental  music 
was  introduced  into  the  Jewish  church,  in  the 
public  worship  of  God.  Some  have  conceived, 
that  it  had  no  existence  prior  to  David,  who. 
having  a  great  genius  for  music,  and  being  him- 
self a  masterly  performer,  incorporated  it  with 
the  tabernacle  service.  Others  suppose,  from  a 
passage  in  the  81st  Psalm,  and  from  another  in 
Clod.  xv.  21.  that  instrumental  music,  in  the 
worship  of  God,  was  practised  by  the  Israelites, 
prior  to  the  giving  of  the  law — "  Sing  aloud  unto 
God  our  strength:  make  a  joyful  noise  unto  the 
God  of  Jacob.  Take  a  psalm,  and  bring  hither  the 
8* 


90 

timbrel,  the  pleasant  harp,  with  the  psalterx . — 
This  he  ordained  in  Joseph  for  a  testimony,  when 
he  went  out  through  the  land  of  Egypt."  M  And 
Miriam  the  prophetess,  the  sister  of  Aaron,  took 
a  timbrel  in  her  hand;  and  all  the  women  went 
out  after  her  with  timbrels  and  with  dances." 
While  there  are  others,  who  are  of  opinion,  and 
perhaps  with  equal  good  reason,  that  instrumental 
music,  in  the  public  worship  of  God,  was  chiefly 
instituted  by  Moses,  and  that  it  forms  an  enact- 
ment of  the  ceremonial  law.  Thus,  Num.  x.  10. 
"  Also  in  the  day  of  your  gladness,  and  in  your 
solemn  clays,  and  in  the  beginnings  of  your 
months,  ye  shall  blow  with  the  trumpets  over  your 
burnt-oflerings,  and  over  the  sacrifices  of  your 
peaee-oilerings;  thai  they  may  be  to  you  for  a 
memorial  before  3  our  God.  I  am  the  Lord  your 
God.*'  Of  which  last  opinion  is  Calvin;  for  in 
his  commentary  upon  Psalm  xxxii.  2.  he  pro- 
nounces instrumental  music  a  part  of  the  "  Pce- 
dagogia  Legalis;"  that  is,  a  Levitical  institution. 
But  whatever  opinion  be  adopted,  concerning 
the  precise  period  w  hen  instrumental  music 
introduced  into  the  Hebrew  church,  we  can  n 
assent  to  the  averment  of  our  brother,  "  that  in  a 
"  system  of  merely  temporary  institution,  it  was 
"  not  deemed  necessary,  by  positive  enactin 
M  either  to  forbid,  or  to  enjoin  the  use  of  in 
"  mental  music;    but  it  was  left  to  the  will. 

>n,   and   circumstances  of  the  worship- 
For  whether  we  are  of  opinion  or  not, 
thai  i  lative  to  the  ceremonial 

law,    and   the   tabernacle  service,    was   shown   to 
Moses  on  the  mount,    it    is   certain    that   David, 
who  w.i    raised  l>\  Divine  Providence,  to  be  king 
Israel,  having  a  great  genius  for  music,  did 


91 

either  amplify  what  he  found  in  the  institution 
of  Moses,  with  regard  to  instrumental  music,  or 
did  himself  introduce  it  into  the  tabernacle  ser- 
vice, believing  it  would  contribute  to  soften  the 
rugged  temper  of  the  people. 

If  the  last  opinion  be  the  just  one,  namely, 
that  it  was  David,  who,  either  to  gratify  his  own 
genius  for  music,  or  from  believing  it  would  con- 
tribute to  soften  the  rugged  temper  of  the  people, 
added  the  pomp  of  instrumental  music  to  the 
tabernacle  service,  which  was  afterwards  adopted 
by  his  son  in  the  service  of  the  temple ;  then  we 
shall  be  entitled  to  say,  from  a  strict  exami- 
nation of  the  history  of  the  Hebrew  republic,  that, 
like  the  first  appointment  of  a  king  in  the  person 
of  Saul,  and  like  the  building  of  a  temple,  sug- 
gested by  David  himself,  ihis  was  a  form  of  wor- 
ship neither  commanded,  nor  even  highly  ap- 
proved of  by  God,  but  simply  permitted.  This 
view  of  the  matter  seems  to  be  countenanced,  by 
that  marked  and  accurate  distinction  which  is 
kept  up  in  Scripture,  when  speaking  of  the  tem- 
ple service,  betwixt  what  was  positively  enjoined 
by  the  ceremonial  law,  and  what  was  commanded 
by  David  the  king.  "  And  the  priests  waited  on 
their  offices  ;  the  Levites  also  with  instruments 
of  music  of  the  Lord,  which  David  the  king  had 
made  to  praise  the  Lord."*  "  And  when  the 
builders  laid  the  foundation  of  the  temple  of 
the  Lord,  they  set  the  priests  in  their  apparel, 
with  trumpets,  and  the  Levites,  the  sons  of  Asaph, 
with  cymbals,  to  pra.'se  the  Lord  after  the  ordi- 
nance of  David  king  of  Israel. "f 

If,  on  the  other  hand,  authorities  are  not  want- 

*  2  Chron.  vii.  6.  t  Ezra  iii.  10. 


iog  to  countenance  the  opinion,  that  there 
positive  enactments  in  the  law  of  Moses,  in  favour 
at  least  of  one  kind  of  musical  instruments,  with 
which  all  the  earth  is  exhorted  to  a  make  a  joyful 
noise  unto  the  Lord,"*  the  conclusion  must  be, 
that  it  is  a  constituent  part  of  the  ceremonial  law. 
u  And  he  set  the  Levins  in  the  house  of  the  Lord 
with  cymbals,  with  psalteries,  and  with  harps, 
according  to  the  commandment  of  David,  and  of 
Gad  the  king's  seer,  and  Nathan  the  prophet: 
for  so  was  the  commandment  of  the  Lord  by  his 
prophets.  And  the  Levites  stood  with  the  instru- 
ments of  David,  and  the  priests  with  the  trumpets. 
— And  when  the  burnt-otfering  began,  the  xnic;  of 
the  Lord  began  also  with  the  trumpets,  and  with* 
the  instruments  ordained  by  David  king  oi^  Israel. 
And  all  the  congregation  worshipped,  and  the 
singers  sang,  and  the  trumpeters  sounded:  and 
all  this  continued  until  the  burnt-offering  was 
finished."! 

Whichever  of  these  opinions  we  adopt,  it  is 
evident,  that  the  regulations  relative  to  instru- 
mental music,  in  the  public  worship  of  God,  are 
as  much  incorporated  with  the  Mosaic  or  Jewish 
constitution  as  circumcision,  which  was  instituted 
long  before  the  giving  of  the  law;  or  as  the  tem- 
ple itself,  which  was  not  built  till  after  the  death 
of  David.  Therefore,  we  are  entitled  to  con- 
clude, that  circumcision,  sacrifice,  instrumental 
music,  and  the  temple — the1  an  hole  of  these  insti- 
tutions,  must  stand  or  fall  together. 

We  shall  allow  to  our  brother,  that  David  was 
;i  prophet,  and  that  he  was  actuated  !»y  the  purest 
motive.-,   when    he   set   apart  a  particular  CmSS  <>!' 

Psalm  \e\iii.  4.         \ 2  Chron.  xxis  25 — 28 


93 

people  10  siny;  those  hymns  which  he  composed; 
with  the  accompaniment  of  instruments  of  music, 
improved  or  invented  by  himself.  Still,  it  does 
not  follow,  that  the  worship  of  God  should  have 
any  such  accompaniment  under  the  Gospel. 

We  shall  even  allow,  that  under  the  Pccdagogia 
Legalis,  all  the  instruments  mentioned  in  the 
150th  Psalm,  were  daily  used  in  the  temple,  and 
that  the  whole  ritual  worship  prescribed  by  the 
law.  by  David,  and  the  prophets,  was  in  full  au- 
thority, and  in  uninterrupted  observation,  until 
the  publication  of  the  Gospel.  It  remains  still  to 
be  considered,  whether  Christianity  did  not  dis- 
solve the  ritual  obligations  of  the  law,  and  en- 
tirely change  many  of  those  institutions,  which 
relate  to  the  worship  of  God. 

It  seems  to  be  acknowledged  by  all  descriptions 
of  Christians,  that  among  the  Hebrews,  instru- 
mental music,  in  the  public  worship  of  God,  was 
essentially  connected  with  sacrifice — with  the 
morning  and  evening  sacrifice,  and  with  the  sa- 
crifices to  be  offered  up  on  great  and  solemn  days. 
But  as  all  the  sacrifices  of  the  Hebrews  were 
completely  abolished  by  the  death  of  our  blessed 
Redeemer,  so  instrumental  music,  whether  enact- 
ed by  Moses,  or  introduced  by  the  ordinance  of 
David,  or  if  you  will,  of  Abraham,  or  any  other 
patriarch,  being  so  intimately  connected  with 
sacrifice,  and  belonging  to  a  service  which  was 
ceremonial  and  typical,  must  be  abolished  with 
that  service ;  and  we  can  have  no  warrant  to 
recall  it  into  the  Christian  church,  any  more  than 
we  have  to  use  other  abrogated  rites  of  the  Jew- 
ish religion,  of  which  it  is  a  part.  Nor  was  there 
any  need  for  a  particular  commandment  to  abolish 
it,  as  our  brother  seems  to  think,  seeing  that  the 


94 

whole  service,  of  which  it  is  apart,  is  compli 
abrogated. 

But  as  our  brother  states  it  as  his  first  and  great 
argument,  that  instrumental  music  is  not  forbid- 
den in  the  word  of  God,  but  is  u  expressly  ( ,\eou- 
"  raged,  perhaps  enjoined,  in  the  Old  Testament, 
"  and  clearly  authorized  by  the  New ;"  your  com- 
mittee conceive  it  their  duty,  to  bring  forward  the 
following- reasoning  from  Scripture,  in  opposition 
to  the  last  part  of  his  averment,  viz,  that  it  i- 
clearly  authorized  by  the  New. 

We  find,  in  Scripture,  much  information  con- 
cerning great  changes  to  be  made  respecting  re- 
ligious services  uuder  the  Gospel.  These  were 
foretold  in  the  Old  Testament,  and  they  are  ex- 
plained in  the  New.  The  Apostle,  writing  to  the 
Hebrews,  declares,  that  the  priesthood  b<  un- 
changed, "  there  is  made  of  necessity  a  change 
also  of  the  law."*  We  are  informed  by  the 
same  inspired  writer,  that  "  the  first  covenant  had 
ordinances  of  divine  services,"  which  he  describes 
as  consisting  chiefly  "  in  meats  and  drinks,  and 
diverse  washings,  and  carnal  ordinances,"  which 
he  says,  were  "  imposed  until  the  time  of  refor- 
mation."! The  carnal  ordinances  include  all  tin* 
ritual,    which  was  addressed    to  t!:  3   and 

imagination,  but  neither  enlightened  the  under- 
standing, nor  purified  the  conscience.  By  what- 
ever authority  these  were  imposed,  thej  were  only 
to  continue  till  "  the  time  of  reformation."  And 
whatever  is  meant  by  "  (lie  time  of  reformation," 
it  cannot  be  doubted  that  it  is  now  past,  and 
consequently,  that  the  carnal  ordinances  imposed 
under  the  former  covenant,  are  no  longer  obliga< 

}•  |  Heb.  a,  1—1^ 


95 

.     The)  were  the  rudiments  of  the  world— • 

the  shadow  of  things  to  come,  but  the  body  is 
Christ  The  substance,  which  all  these  things 
represented,  is  to  be  found  in  the  New  Testament. 
The  apostolic  decree,  recorded  in  the  15th  chap- 
ter of  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  ;  the  ministrations 
and  epistles  of  St.  Paul ;  and  particularly  his 
strictures  on  the  doctrines  of  Judaizing  teachers, 
show,  that  Christians  are  not  under  the  law,  but 
under  grace. 

From  the  beginning  of  the  world,  there  has 
been  a  moral  law,  and  a  spiritual  worship,  which 
remain  unchanged  under  every  dispensation. 
Whatever  is  to  be  found  in  the  Old  Testament, 
with  regard  to  either  of  these,  is  of  permanent 
and  everlasting  obligation.  But  with  respect  to 
the  modes  of  external  worship,  there  was  to  be  an 
entire  change,  which  was  announced  by  our  Lord 
himself,  in  a  very  early  period  of  his  ministry. 
•;  The  hour  cometh,  when  ye  shall  neither  on  this 
mountain,  nor  yet  at  Jerusalem,  worship  the  Fa- 
ther.— But  the  hour  cometh,  and  now  is,  when 
the  true  worshippers  shall  worship  the  Father  in 
spirit  and  in  truth:  for  the  Father  seeketh  such 
to  worship  him.  God  is  a  spirit:  and  they  that 
worship  him,  must  worship  him  in  spirit  and  in 
truth  f* — not  according  to  the  old  institution, 
in  the  hour  that  was  past,  but  according  to 
the  new  institution,  in  the  hour  which  cometh, 
and  now  is.  Nor  must  it  be  forgotten,  that  it 
is  not  the  ordinary  manner  of  the  writers  of 
the  New  Testament,  to  inform  us  what  divine 
institutions  were  to  be  abrogated,  but  only  what 
ervances  were  to  take  place  under  the  Gos- 

u  iv.  21;  23,  24. 


96 

pel.  They  do  not  tell  us  that  the  PassoveJ 
was  no  longer  to  be  observed,  but  only  that 
the  Lord's  Supper  was  to  be  administered^    So, 

with  respect  to  praising  God,  they  do  not  ex- 
pressly say,  that  instrumental  music  is  to  be  si- 
lenced, but  they  do  expressly  say,  that  God  is  to 
be  praised  and  worshipped  by  singing  psalms,  and 
hymns,  and  spiritual  songs,  with  understanding 
and  grace  in  the  heart,  for  the  purposes  of  in- 
structing and  comforting  one  another.  Thi<  is 
to  be  the  change  under  the  Gospel,  as  far  as 
psalmody  is  concerned. 

The  only  point  which  remains  to  be  ascer- 
tained, is,  whether  this  necessary  change  of  the 
law  extends  to  instrumental  music,  as  a  con- 
comitant of  the  New  Testament  psalmody.  On 
this  point,  our  brother  has  given  a  most  decided 
opinion,  that  "  instrumental  music  is  clearly  au- 
"  thorized  by  the  New  Testament;  and  that,  be- 
"  fore  declaring  our  prohibition  of  Organs,  it  is 
"  incumbent  on  the  chusch  to  expunge  from  the 
"  sacred  records,  these  passages  which  seem 
"  clearly  to  recommend  the  use  of  instruments  in 
u  public  worship — that  thus  the  worshippers  may 
"  he  delivered  from  the  inconsistency  of  pro- 
"  mising,  and  exhorting  each  other  to  do,  what 
u  in  their  hearts  they  resolve  not,  and  by  the 
"  church  are  forbidden,  to  perform." 

In  support  of  these  assertions,  our  brother  ex- 
claims, in  his  statement,  "  No  where  do  we  find 
u  the  great  Head  of  the  chinch  repealing  the  in- 
"  junctions  pronounced  by  the  psalmist  David! 
•'  And  it  is  impossible  to  think  that  our  blessed 
"  Saviour  would  have  been  silent  on  tiie  subject, 
"  if  instrumental  music  had  been  a  gross  profkn* 
*  ation  of  sacred  thhurs.     No  where  do  we  find 


97 

•  St.  Paul  warning  against  harp,  and  psaltery, 
-k  and  Organ.  Nay,  we  find  St.  John  declaring, 
*  that  he  heard  harpers  harping  with  their  harps 
"  in  heaven." 

Without  saying  any  thing  more  severe  on  this 
mode  of  reasoning  adopted  by  our  brother,  we 
conceive  that  it  is  neither  agreeable  to  the  rules 
of  just  biblical  criticism,  nor  to  sound  philoso- 
phy. We  have  already  observed,  that  it  is  not  the 
ordinary  manner  of  the  writers  of  the  New  Tes- 
tament, to  inform  us  what  divine  institutions  were 
to  be  abrogated,  but  only  what  observances  were 
to  take  place  under  the  Gospel.  And  does  not 
every  Christian  know,  that  during  our  Saviour's 
abode  upon  earth,  the  "  time  of  reformation" 
was  not  fully  come — that  Jesus  was  not  yet  glo- 
rified— that  it  was  the  money-changers,  not  the 
priests  and  Levites,  that  our  Lord  cast  out  of  the 
temple ;  and  of  course,  that  it  was  the  benches  of 
the  former,  not  the  altar,  sacrifices,  Organs,  of 
the  latter,  which  he  overturned?  If  Jesus  did 
not  destroy  the  temple,  but  only  foretold  its  de- 
struction, is  it  not  self-evident  that  its  ministers, 
and  all  the  instruments  employed  by  them,  whe- 
ther musical  or  sacrificial,  must  remain  along 
with  it  ?  We  shall  transcribe  the  judgment,  on 
this  point,  of  an  eminent  Protestant  divine,  who 
is  allowed,  by  all  parties,  to  have  been  one  of 
the  soundest  and  most  judicious  biblical  critics : — 
11  The  Holy  Ghost  is  here  mentioned  as  the  great 
"  gift  of  the  Gospel  times,  as  coming  down  from 
"  heaven,  not  absolutely — not  as  to  his  person, 
u  but  with  respect  unto  an  especial  work,  namely, 
M  the  change  of  the  whole  state  of  religious  wor- 
"  ship  in  the  church  of  God:  Whereas  we  shall 
"  see,  in  the  next  words,  he  is  spoken  of  only  with 
9 


••  respect  unto  external  actual  operations.  But 
"  Ik?  was  the  great,  the  promised  heavenly  gift, 
•  to  be  bestowed  under  the  New  Testament,  03 
;-  whom  God  would  institute  and  ordain  a  new 
••  way,  and  new  rites  of  worship,  upon  the  reve- 
"  lation  of  himself  and  will  in  Christ.  Unto  him 
••  was  committed  the  reformation  of  all  things  in 
"  the  church,  whose  time  was  now  come,  chap. 
"  ix.  10.  The  Lord  Christ,  when  he  ascended 
11  into  heaven,  left  all  things  standing  and  conti- 
:;  nuing  in  religious  worship  as  they  had  done 
tc  from  the  days  of  Moses;  though  he  had  vir- 
t;  tually  put  an  end  unto  it.  And  he  commanded 
"  his  disciples,  that  they  should  attempt  no  altera- 
"  tion  therein,  until  the  Holy  Ghost  were  sent 
"  from  heaven,  to  enable  them  thereunto,  Acts  i. 
11  4,  5.  But  when  he  came  as  the  great  gift  of 
"  God,  promised  under  the  New  Testament,  he 
11  removes  all  the  carnal  worship  and  ordinances 
11  of  Moses,  and  that  by  the  full  revelation  of  the 
"  accomplishment  of  all  that  was  signified  by 
"  them,  and  appoints  the  new,  holy,  spiritual 
11  worship  of  the  Gospel,  that  was  to  succeed  in 
"  their  room.  The  Spirit  of  God,  therefore,  as 
"  bestowed  for  the  introduction  of  the  new  Gos- 
"  pel  state,  in  truth  and  worship,  is  the  heavenh 
11  gift  here  intended."* 

As  to  the  authority  borrowed  from  St.  Paul, 
by  interpreting  his  silence  as  expressive  of  his 
approbation  of  harps,  psalteries,  and  Organs,  our 
brother  seems  not  to  be  aware,  thai  instrumental 
music  belonged  entirely  to  the  temple  service, 
and  never  was  employed  in  the  synagogue. 
Hence  Paul,  in  all  his  journcyings,  could  not  find 

*  Owen  on  the  Hebrews,  chap,  ti 


99 

a  single  harp,  or  psaltery,  or  Organ,  in  any  of  the 
religious  assemblies  of  his  countrymen,  beyond 
the  precincts  of  the  temple  at  Jerusalem;  of  con- 
sequence, warning  or  reproof  on  this  subject, 
from  that  apostle,  is  not  to  be  expected.  This 
circumstance  accounts  for  the  Jewish  converts 
never  betraying,  as  far  as  we  know,  the  least  pre- 
dilection for  instrumental  music  in  the  public 
worship  of  God,  while  they  discovered  a  strong 
attachment  to  circumcision,  and  other  Levitical 
institutions.  Had  St.  Paul,  therefore,  approved 
or  admired  instrumental  music  in  the  public  wor- 
ship of  God,  however  poor  and  persecuted  the 
Apostolic  Church  might  be,  it  is  not  to  be  sup- 
posed that  he  would  have  preserved  such  pro- 
found silence  on  the  subject.  On  the  contrary, 
he  would  have  disburdened  his  oppressed  mind — 
he  would  have  recorded  his  principles — he  would 
have  deplored  the  direful  calamity  of  the  times, 
and  earnestly  recommended  the  introduction,  or 
the  revival  of  instrumental  music  in  the  churches, 
the  very  first  moment  that  the  wealth,  and  safety, 
and  peace  of  the  church,  rendered  it  practicable. 
But  St.  Paul  has  recorded  no  such  sentiments. 
Instead  of  speaking  in  commendation  of  instru- 
mental music  in  the  public  worship  of  God,  we 
find  him  on  one  occasion,  borrowing  an  allusion 
from  it,  expressive  of  something  like  contempt: 
"  Though  I  speak  with  the  tongue  of  men  and 
angels,  and  have  not  charity,  I  am  become  as  a 
sounding  brass,  or  a  tinkling  cymbal."* 

But  our  brother  imagines,  that  he  is  particularly 
countenanced  in  his  favourite  measure,  by  a  pas- 
sage in  the  book  of  Revelation,  where  St.  John 

*  1  Cor,  xiii.  1. 


100 

expn  lares,  that  he  beard  "  harp 

ing  with  their  harps  in  heaven."*  ;*  Words  can- 
"  not  be  simpler,  (says  our  brother,)  nor  convt  \ 
"  more  plainly  an  unequivocal  meaning,  and  that 
11  meaning  clearly  is,  that  instrumental  music  i=> 
11  at  least  not  inconsistent  with  the  purity  ofevan- 
"  gelical  praise.''  The  author  of  the  Statem 
then,  can  produce  only  a  negative  conclusion,  and 
that  from  a  single  highly  figurative  passage  of 
the  New  Testament,  in  support  of  his  favourite 
measure — a  negative  conclusion,  too,  repugnant 
to  the  principles  and  practice  of  the  Church  of 
Scotland,  and  countenanced  by  nothing  but  what 
we  apprehend  is  a  mistaken  commentary  of 
Scripture.  Even  supposing  for  a  moment,  that. 
apparently  to  short-sighted  mortals,  an\  usaj 
not  inconsistent  with  divine  revelation,  are  we, 
on  tiiat  account,  to  blend  that  usage  with  the 
worship  of  God  ?  The  Established  Church  of 
Scotland  allows  no  such  latitudinarian  principle. 
This  was  precisely  the  mode  of  reasoning,  by 
which  the  Popish  corruptions  were  introduced 
into  Baptism  and  the  Lord's  Supper,  and  b\ 
which  any  system  of  will-worship  may  be  vin- 
dicated. 

Our  brother  likewise  cannot  be  ignorant,  that 
commentators  are  by  no  means  agreed,  that  the 
celestial  state,  and  the  exercises  of  the  redeemed 
in  heaven,  are  the  subject  of  this  vision  of  St 
John.  Whatever  be  in  this,  it  is  evident,  that  the 
imager}  of  the  context  is  terrestrial  and  Lwitii-al. 
and  not  evangelical.  The  scene  of  the  vision  is 
upon  Mount  Zion,  and  the  voice  from  heaven  is 
described  as  u  the  voice  of  many  waters,  and  as 

!'•  i    ...  2 


101 

the  voice  of  a  great  thunder;"  evidently  alluding 
lo  the  region  whence  the  water  descends,  and  in 
which  the  thunder  rolls.  A  lamb,  Mount  Zion, 
harpers  and  their  harps,  an  hundred  and  forty- 
four  thousand,  elders,  first-fruits — do  not  all  these 
images,  in  their  literal  meaning,  carry  back  the 
mind  to  Jerusalem,  and  place  us  among  the 
Jewish  worshippers  in  the  courts  of  the  temple? 
It  would  be  in  vain  to  expect,  that,  in  a  vision, 
"  the  forms  of  Christian  worship"  would  present 
themselves  in  as  familiar  a  manner  to  the  mind  of 
St.  John,  as  the  worship  of  the  temple.  For  no 
man,  no  author,  sacred  or  profane,  takes  his  al- 
lusions invariably  from  what  is  modern  or  fami- 
liar. The  mantle  of  antiquity  must  often  be 
thrown  around  allusions  and  illustrations,  to  ren- 
der them  venerable  and  majestic;  and  this,  we 
apprehend,  is  most  judiciously  done,  in  the  pas- 
sage before  us,  whether  the  subject  of  the  vision 
recorded  in  it,   refer  to  the  church  militant  or 

TRIUMPHANT. 

Your  committee,  therefore,  are  bold  to  con- 
tend, that  no  better  authority  for  instrumental 
music  can  be  drawn  from  this  highly  figurative 
language  of  St.  John,  than  there  can  be  deduced 
from  his  allegorical  description  of  the  new  Jeru- 
salem, that  heaven,  the  place  of  happiness  for  the 
righteous,  is  literally  a  splendid  city,  "  having 
twelve  gates,  and  every  several  gate  of  one  pearl; 
and  that  its  walls  are  of  jasper,  and  its  streets  of 
pure  gold." 

If  your  committee  were  to  borrow  any  thing 
concerning  the  form  of  evangelical  praise  to  be 
used  by  Christians,  from  the  book  of  Revelation, 
they  would  take  it  rather  from  the  6th  and  7ih 
verses  of  this  14th  chapter,  than  from  the  2cl 
9* 


102 

verse.  "And  I  saw  another  angel  ih  in  the 
midst  of  heaven,  having  die  everlasting  gospel  to 

preach  unto  them  that  dwell  on  the  earth,  and  to 
every  nation,  and  kindred,  and  tongue,  and  peo- 
ple; saying,  with  a  loud  voice,  Fear  Cod,  and 
give  glory  to  him,  for  the  hour  of  h\<  judgment 
is  come:  and  Worship  him  that  made  heaven  and 
earth,  and  the  sea,  and  the  fountains  of  waters*" 
Here  he  saw  no  harpers,  no  psalteries,  no  Organs. 
And  in  that  beautiful  and  sublime  description  of 
the  church  universal,  in  chap.  vii.  9.  and  12. 
"  After  this  I  beheld,  and  lo,  a  great  multitude, 
which  no  man  could  number,  of  all  nations  and 
kindreds,  and  people,  and  tongues,  stood  before 
the  throne,  and  before  the  Lamb,  clothed  with 
white  robes,  and  palms  in  their  hands  ;  saying, 
Amen:  Blessing,  and  glory,  and  wisdom,  and 
thanksgiving,  and  honour,  and  power,  and  might, 
be  to  our  God,  for  ever  and  ever.  Amen." 
Here  again  he  saw  no  harpers  harping  with  their 
harps. 

Far  then  from  finding  instrumental  music  in  the 
public  worship  of  God,  "  clearly  authorized  by  the 
New  Testament,"  your  committee  contend,  that 
there  is  not  a  vestige  of  such  authority,  unless  we 
violate  the  laws  of  sound  criticism,  and  confound 
the  literal  and  figurative  meaning  of  language. 
Our  blessed  Lord  did  not  condemn  instrumental 
music,  because  it  was  a  constituent  part  of  the 
temple  service,  which,  with  other  Lcvitical  insti- 
tutions, were  to  outlive  himself  and  only  to  be 
nailed  to  his  cross,  or  abolished  h\  his  death. 
The  apostle  Paid  could  not  speak  against  it  in 
the  synagogues,  for  in  them  it  nev(  r  existed.  He 
could  not  warn  or  reprove  the  Je\\i>h  converts, 
for,  as  far  as  ire  know,  the\  never  betrayed  a 


103 

desire  to  employ  it.  The  truth  seems  to  be  this. 
as  far  as  your  committee  can  speak  positively 
from  the  writings  of  the  New  Testament,  there  are 
in  that  sacred  record  but  two  ways  enjoined  of 
offering  up  our  praises  to  God  in  public  worship : 
The  one  bv  thanksgiving,  without  the  vocal  me- 
lody of  the  congregation;  the  other  by  the  con- 
gregation singing,  with  the  human  voice,  psalms, 
and  hymns,  and  spiritual  songs.  Thus,  in 
1  Tim.  ii.  1.  we  have  an  express  commandment 
for  thanksgiving  to  be  a  stated  part  of  our  public 
worship.  "  I  exhort,  therefore,  that  first  of  all, 
supplications,  prayers,  intercessions,  and  giving 
of  thanks,  be  made  for  all  men."  And  it  is  be- 
lieved, that  this  giving  of  thanks  varied  accord- 
ing to  the  nature  of  the  mercies  which  the  church 
was  daily  receiving:*  and  that  the  people  per- 
formed no  other  part  in  these  thanksgivings,  than 
saying,  Amen. 

The  second  method  is,  what  the  Scriptures  en- 
join relative  to  praising  God,  by  singing  psalms, 
and  hymns,  and  spiritual  songs.  Your  committee 
believe  that  there  are  only  four  passages  in  the 
New  Testament,  which  speak  distinctly  and  di- 
rectly on  this  subject.  "  Let  the  word  of  Christ 
dwell  in  you  richly  in  all  wisdom;  teaching  and 
admonishing  one  another  in  psalms,  and  hymns, 
and  spiritual  songs,  singing  with  grace  in  your 
hearts  to  the  Lord."f  "  Speaking  to  yourselves 
in  psalms,  and  hymns,  and  spiritual  songs,  sing- 
ing and  making  melody  in  your  heart  to  the 
Lord. "J  "  Is  any  among  you  afflicted?  let  him 
pray:    Is  any  merry?    let  him  sing  psalms. "|| 


Eph.  i.  3.     1  Pet.  i.  3.         f  Col.  iii.  16.         |  Eph.  v.  19. 
||  James  v.  13. 


104 

"  By  him  therefore  let  us  offer  the  sacrifice  of 
praise  to  God  continually,  that  i>.  the  fruit  of  our 
lips,  giving  thanks  to  his  name."*  In  all  these 
passages,    it  is  an  undeniable  matter  of  fact ,  thai 

the  primitive  Christians  understood,  singing  with 
the  human  voice  alone,  as  enjoined;  (i>r  this,  and 
this  only,  they  employed  in  singing  to  the  Lord, 
making  melody  in  their  hearts.  Among  them, 
the  accompaniment  of  any  instrument  of  music,  in 
the  public  worship  of  God,  was  never  known  nor 
named. 

Your  committee  are  aware,  that  Bishop  King 
would  wish  to  persuade  us,  that  the  apostles,  in 
the  passages  above  quoted,  recommend  the  use 
of  musical  instruments  in  the  public  worship  of 
God,  seeing  they  use  a  word,  which,  in  the  origi- 
nal language,  he  says,  signifies  singing  with 
an  instrument;  psallo.  But  this  very  criticism 
serves  to  show  upon  what  slender  foundation 
the  patrons  of  instrumental  music  build.  Thus, 
the  word  generally  used  in  the  New  Testament 
for  worshipping,  (proskuneo,)  signified),  in  the 
original,  to  pay  homage  by  the  kissing  of  the 
hand:  of  course,  if  we  are  to  follow  the  analogy 
drawn  from  the  original  meaning  of  a  Greek 
word,  Christian  worshippers  would  only  have 
been  obligated  to  have  paid  their  homage  to  God 
by  the  kissing  of  the  hand.  This  is  not  all; 
for  it  is  evident,  that  these  injunctions,  be  their 
meaning  what  it  may,  are  directly  and  expressly 
addressed  to  all  Christians,  either  considered  as 
mbled  for  public  worship,  or  in  their  private 
individual  capacity.  Now,  is  it  at  all  credible, 
that  each  indi\  idual  Christian  in  these  times,  or  at 

"  Ih •!>.  \iii.  15. 


103 

other  time,  was  capable  of  using  a  musical 
instrument;  or  that  a  suggestion,  which  involves 
a  moral  impossibility,  could  be  made  to  the  mind 
of  the  apostles  by  the  infallible  Spirit  of  God: 

When,  therefore,  we  concentrate  all  the  parts 
of  our  argument  together,  viz.  that  instrumental 
music  was  confined  to  the  service  of  the  temple, 
and  most  intimately  connected  with  the  offering 
up  of  sacrifice,  and  that  we  have  no  warrant  to 
transfer  it  into  the  Christian  church,  anymore  than 
odier  rites  of  the  Jewish  religion: — that  the  silence 
of  our  blessed  Lord,  and  of  his  apostles,  upon 
the  subject,  affords  no  presumption  that  they  ap- 
proved of  the  measure — and,  finally,  that  the 
passages  in  the  New  Testament,  which  relate  ex- 
pressly to  the  praises  of  God,  either  allude  to 
thanksgiving,  pronounced  by  the  minister,  with- 
out the  vocal  melody  of  the  congregation,  or  to 
singing  with  the  human  voice  alone,  psalms,  and 
hymns,  and  spiritual  songs, — we  have  no  hesitation 
in  pronouncing  a  judgment  in  direct  opposition 
to  the  first  and  the  chief  argument  of  the  minister 
of  St.  Andrew's  church.  We  say,  that  the  use  of 
instrumental  music,  in  the  public  worship  of  God, 
is  not  authorized  by  the  New  Testament — that 
whether  it  was  enjoined  by  Moses,  or  only  intro- 
duced b}~  David,  it  was  appropriated  to  the  tem- 
ple service,  and,  of  course,  abrogated  with  it. 
The  singing  of psalms ,  hymns,  and  spiritual  songs, 
in  the  heart,  to  the  Lord,  not  the  playing  of  them, 
is  the  express  language  of  the  New  Testament. 
Therefore,  instrumental  music  is  neither  enjoined, 
nor  authorized,  nor  encouraged  by  the  word  of 
God,  in  the  public  worship  of  Christians. 

As  to  that  observation  made  by  our  brother, 
that   "  when  we  look  into   the  history  even  of 


106 

*  those  nations  that  were  strangers  to  divine 
14  revelation,  there  we  find  universally  the  use  of 
;t  instruments  in  giving  praise  to  their  cod-." 
We  consider  any  reasoning,  founded  upon  hea- 
then examples,  as  of  no  weight  whatever  in  de- 
ciding this  question,  and  even  as  hardly  requiring 
a  serious  answer.  According  to  our  brother's 
own  principles,  "  the  fixed  and  infallible  standard93 
for  the  worship  of  Christians,  is  the  word  of  God 
alone.  What  he  is  pleased  to  say  proceeds  from 
the  unadulterated  light  of  nature,  we  affirm, 
ariseth  from  a  blind  and  corrupt  superstition  : 
and  if  we  were  disposed  to  indulge  in  conjecture, 
about  the  origin  of  manners  and  customs  anion 
the  heathen,  we  would  tell  him,  that  Jubal,  of  the 
race  of  cursed  Cain,  a  race  which  early  began  to 
corrupt  the  worship  of  the  Supreme  Being,  was 
"  the  father  of  all  such  as  handle  the  harp  and 
Organ."*  And  there  is  no  doubt,  that  Ham. 
who  was  born  long  before  the  flood,  and  of 
course  was  acquainted  with  many  of  Cain's  pos- 
terity, would  transmit  some  of  their  corrupt  super- 
stitious notions  of  religious  worship  to  Cush,  Mil*- 
raim,  and  Canaan,  the  fathers  of  the  Chaldeans, 
Egyptians,  and  Phoenicians;  those  nations  which, 
ancient  history  informs  us,  first  set  up  idols,  and 
introduced  instrumental  music  into  the  public 
worship  of  their  gods. 

2.  Let  us  now  proceed  to  the  second  argument 
of  our  brother,  the  minister  of  St.  Andrew's 
church,  and  examine  those  conclusions,  which, 
he  affirms,  may  be  drawn  from  the  history  of  the 
church,    in  behalf  of  his  favourite  measure,       He 

affirms,  that  although  instrumental  music,  in  the 

•  Gen  iv.  21 


107 

^iiip  of  God,  was  not  known  till  "  about  the 
"  middle  of  the  eighth  century;  yet  then  it  was 
"  introduced,  through  the  dictates  of  pious  feel- 
"  ing,  prompting  the  enlightened  mind  to  conse- 
i;  crate  the  labours  of  genius  to  the  devout  exer- 
"  cise  of  praise."  He  farther  affirms,  that  "  in- 
"  strumental  music  forms  no  essential  part  of 
11  Popery,  being  founded  on  principles  widely 
"  different  from  the  ceremonies  of  the  Church  of 
"  Rome,  and  therefore  retained  and  employed  by 
11  all  the  Reformed  churches  on  the  continent." — 
"  A  stronger  argument  (continues  he)  in  its  fa- 
"  vour  cannot  be  produced,  except  that  which  I 
"  have  already  mentioned,  the  sacred  authority 
"  of  Scripture."  We  have  fairly  stated  this  se- 
cond argument.  Our  brother's  reasoning,  in 
support  of  these  bold  conclusions,  your  com- 
mittee conceive  to  be  very  unsatisfactory. 

According  to  his  own  statement  of  the  matter, 
instrumental  music  was  not  used,  for  the  first 
seven  centuries.  This  period,  it  is  well  known, 
comprehends,  along  with  the  apostolic  age,  not 
only  the  poorest  and  most  persecuted,  but  also  the 
most  splendid  and  prosperous  times  of  the  primi- 
tive church.  The  practice  of  such  a  period, 
will  more  than  counterbalance  any  thing  that 
even  the  Reformed  churches  on  the  continent  can 
furnish.  To  pretend  to  account  for  this  re- 
markable fact,  upon  the  ground  that  the  church 
had,  during  so  many  centuries,  no  leisure,  or 
means,  or  knowledge,  to  attend  to  sacred  music, 
is  a  very  unphilosophical  and  inaccurate  mode  of 
reasoning.  They  had  both  leisure  and  inclina- 
tion to  form  the  most  abstruse  and  metaphysical 
opinions  concerning  the  doctrines  of  the  Gospel. 
They  had  means   to   build   die    most   splendid 


108 

Churches.     The  emperors  of  the  W  i  de- 

vout, to  a  decree  bordering  upon  superstition. 
The  truth  is,  they  considered  it  as  unlawful  to 
employ  instrumental  music  in  the  worship  of  God. 
In  their  eyes,  it  was  so  intimately  connected  with 
the  temple  service,  that  both  Allans  and  orthodox 
would  have  regarded  themselves  as  returning 
back  to  Judaism,  if  they  had  permitted  it  in  their 
public  worship. 

But  we  do  not  wish  to  support  this  branch  of 
our  argument  by  abstract  speculative  reasoning, 
or  mere  dogmatical  averments.  It  must  rest  upon 
authorities;  which  authorities  we  draw  from  the 
accounts  of  the  primitive  Christians,  as  recorded 
in  the  Fathers,  and  from  the  opinions  of  the 
schoolmen,  and  from  the  judgment  of  the  Re- 
formers. If  they  knew  their  own  sentiments,  or 
have  honestly  recorded  them,  your  committee 
are  confident  that  the  following  authorities  ought 
to  set  this  question  for  ever  at  rest. 

Thus,  in  a  treatise  among  Justin  Martyr's 
works,  we  have  the  following  testimony.  "  <^.  If 
"  songs  were  invented  by  unbelievers,  with  a 
"  design  of  deceiving,  and  were  appointed  for 
"  those  under  the  law,  because  of  the  childishness 
"  of  their  minds;  why  do  they  who  have  received 
"  the  perfect  instructions  of  grace,  which  arc  most 
"  contrary  to  the  foresaid  customs,  neverth 
"  sing  in  the  churches,  a-  tiny  did  who  were 
"  children  under   the  law?     .7.  Plain  singing 


*  A  confusion  seems  t«>  bav<  crept  into  the  minds  <>t*  many, 
relatire  to  singing  tin'  pi  use  "i  God,  The)  conceive,  thai  be- 
cause the  Church  "i  Scotland  iv  hostile  to  th<  luaical 
instrument.-  m  the  public  worship  <»t  God,  Bhe  denies  the  an* 
tiquitv  <.f  vocal  music  in  the  chinch  ol  Christ.  There  i^  ground 
to  believe,  that  the  minister  of  h>t.  Andrew's  church,  bj 


109 

:  not  childish,  but  only  the  singing  with  life- 
"  less  Organs,  with  dancing,  and  cymbals,  &:c. 
t;  Whence  the  use  of  such  instruments,  and  other 
"  things  fit  for  children,  is  laid  aside,  and  plain 
••  singing  only  retained.* 

The  memorable  testimony  of  Pliny,  as  quoted 
by  Tertullian,  combines,  at  once,  Christian  and 
heathen  authority  on  this  subject.  "  We  find  it 
"  has  been  forbidden  to  make  a  search  after  us. 
"  For  when  Pliny  the  Younger  was  governor  of  a 
"  province,  and  had  condemned  some,  and  made 
"  others  comply,  being  disturbed  by  the  great 
"  multitude  of  the  Christians,  he  consulted  Tra- 
"  jam,  acquainting  him,  that  besides  an  obstinate 
"  aversion  to  sacrificing,  he  could  discover  no- 
"  thing  concerning  their  mysteries,  but  that  they 
;'  held  assemblies  before  dav,  to  sing  to  Christ  as 
"  God."f 

Thus,  Basil,  though  he  highly  commends,  and 
zealously  defends,  the  way  of  singing  by  turns,  or 
what  is  styled  antiphonal  singing,  does  not  deny 
that  the  manner  of  singing  in  use  during  the 
apostolic  times,  was  altered  by  him  in  his  church. 


adjutors  and  anonymou?  advocate?,  have  fallen  into  this  mistake. 
Now  there  are  three  things  which  the  Church  of  Scotland  care- 
fully and  accurately  distinguishes.  First,  Plain  singing-,  which 
she  affirms  has  been  in  use  from  the  beginning  of  the  church. 
Secondly,  Cathedral  or  antiphonal  singing,  which  she  takes  to 
be  neither  useful,  nor  very  ancient,  being  the  device  of  the 
fourth  century.  Lastly,  Musical  instruments,  joined  with  sing- 
ing in  the  church,  she  maintains  is  the  invention  of  a  much 
later  age — certainly  not  earlier  than  the  eighth,  and  not  in  ge- 
neral use  till  the  thirteenth  century. 

*  w  En  tais  ccclcsiais  pro  airctai  ek  ton  asmalon  he  chresis  ton. 
toixddn  organon  kui  ton  allon  tots  nepiois  outon  harmodion  km 
hupoleleiptai  to  asai  haplos." — Justin.  Qua-st.  et  Respons.  ad 
Orthodox.  Q.  lUT. 

t  Tertul.  Apol. 

]0 


(10 

On  the  contrary,  he  explicitly  admits,  that  th< 
former  practice  was  for  the  people  rising  before 
day-light,    to  go  to  the  house  of  prayer,    and 

having  made  confession  to  God,  to  rise  from 
prayer,  and  betake  themselves  ("  eU  ten  psalmo- 
"  diem")  to  the  singing  of  psalms.  But  now. 
indeed,  ("  cliche  diantmethcntes,  antipsalloisin  al- 
"  Iclois")  they  sing  to  each  other,  alternately,  in 
parts. — Ep.  lxiii.  And  so  far  from  approving 
musical  instruments  in  the  worship  of  God,  he 
calls  them  "  the  inventions  of  Jubal,  of  the 
"  of  Cain"  and  thus  expresses  himself  concern- 
ing them.  "  Laban  was  a  lover  of  the  harp 
"  and  of  music,  with  which  he  would  have  sent 
"  away  Jacob:  If  then  hadst  told  me,  said  he,  1 
11  would  have  sent  thee  away  with  mirth,  and  mu- 
u  sical  instruments,  and  an  harp.  But  the  pa- 
"  triarch  avoided  that  music,  as  being  a  thing 
"  that  would  hinder  his  regarding  the  work-  of 
i;  the  Lord,  and  his  considering  the  works  of  his 
11  hands. — In  such  vain  arts,  as  the  playing  upon 
"  the  harp  or  pipe,   or  dancing,   (//,  s  tes 

"  energeias,  to  mnaphanidsetai,    Kai  ontos 

"  kaka  ten  apostoli/cen  phonen  to  telos  teuton  apo- 
"  leia")  as  soon  as  the  action  ceases,   the  work 
M  itself  vanishes:  so  that  really,  according  to  the 
11  apostle's  expression,   the  end  of  these  thin:: 
:l  destruction." — Comment,  in  James,  chap.  v. 

ChrysOstom,  who  flourished  in  the  fourth  cen- 
tury, often  ex]  approbation  of  instru- 
mental music,  and  explicitly  d<  "  that  it 
is  only  permitted  to  t::  I  ifice, 
i-  the  imbecili  f  their  souls, 
u  God  c6ndes<  i<>  their  weakness,  because 
"  they  ii'erelatelj  drawn  off  from  idols."   "But 


Ill 

4i  now,  instead  of  Organs,  Christians  nm-t  us< 
;-  the  body  to  praise  God."* 

Jerome,  in  his  commentary  on  Eph.  v.  19.  thus 
delivers  his  judgment  on  this  point.  "  We  must 
"  therefore  sing  and  make  melody ;  and  praise 
*;  the  Lord  rather  with  the  heart  than  the  voice. 
-;  For  this  is  what  is  here  said:  singing  and 
M  making  melody  in  your  heart  to  the  Lord.  Let 
M  young  men  mind  this,  let  them  mind  it  whose 
"  office  is  to  sing  in  the  church.  We  must  sing 
•;  to  God  not  with  the  voice,  but  the  heart.  They 
;<  are  not  artfully  to  supple  their  jaws  and  their 
«  throat,  after  the  manner  of  the  tragedians,  that 
;'  theatrical  notes  and  songs  should  be  heard  in 
;i  the  church;  but  they  are  to  praise  God  with 
"  fear,  with  good  works,  and  the  knowledge  of 
"  the  Scriptures.  If  a  man  has  an  unpleasant 
"  voice,  if  he  has  good  works,  he  is  a  sweet 
"  singer  in  God's  ears.  Let  the  servant  of  Christ 
"  so  sing,  that  not  the  voice  of  the  singer,  but  the 
"  thing  sung,  may  please;  that  the  evil  spirit  that 
M  was  in  Saul  may  be  cast  out  of  those,  who,  in 
"  like  manner,  are  possessed  by  him,  and  not  be 
"  let  into  those  who  have  turned  the  house  of 
"  God  into  a  stage. "j     This  shows,  as  has  been 


*  •'•  Holi  to  palaion  houtot  egonlo  dia  ton  organon  teuton,  dia 
tea  p  achat  eta  tes  dianoias  avion;  kai  to  arti  apespasthai  apo  ton 
eidolon.  Hdsper  can  tos  thusias  sunshoresea  houfo  kai  taata 
epetrepse  sungkatabainon  aaton  tc  astheneia"  "  Alia  tote  men 
orgona  en  di  Hon  tas  ddas  anepheroa.  Aunt  de  anti  organon 
kchresthai  esti  to  somatic — Chrvsostora,  Psalm  cxlix.  and  cxliii. 

t  "  Et  canere  igitur  et  psallere,  et  laudare  Dominum  magis 
animo  quam  voce  debemus.  Hoc  est  quippe,  quod  dicitur 
cantaates  et  p salient cs  in  cordibus  vestris  Domino.  Audiant  hac 
adolescentuli:  audiant  hi  quibus  psallendi  in  Ecclesia  officium  ' 
est,  Deo  non  voce,  sed  corde  cantandum  :  nee  in  TragcdofUin 
modum,  guttur,  et  fauces  dulci  raedicamini  colliniendas  ;  ill  in 
Ecdesia  theatralea  moduli  audiantur  et  Canticn.  sed  in  timore, 


112 

remarked  by  Dr.  Whitfcy,  that  choristers  had  then 
obtained  an  office  in  the  church,  though  Jerome 
OS  not  much  to  approve  of  them.  J  The  disliked 
choristers,  what  would  he  have  thought  of  organ- 
ists? 

Augustine,  Confess,  lib.  10.  eap.  s  bis 

testimony  in  favour  of  plain  song  in  the  worship 
of  God. — "I  wish  all  nice  singing  of  David's 
•  Psalms  were  removed  from  mine,  and  the 
"  church's  hearing;  and  that  seems  safer,  to  ine, 
"  which  I  remember  1  have  been  told  of  Atha- 
"  nasius,  bishop  of  Alexandria,  who  made  the 
"  reader  of  the  psalm  sound  it  with  so  little  altera- 
"  tion  of  his  voice,  that  he  was  more  like  to  a 
u  person  delivering  a  speech,  than  singing." 

Thus  it  is  evident,  from  the  authority  of  the 
Fathers,  that  it  was  simply  vocal  melody  which 
was  used  in  singing  the  praises  of  God,  dui 
the  primitive  times  of  the  church.  And  should 
we  analyze  the  writings  of  ecclesiastical  authors 
in  the  middle  or  scholastic  ages,  we  shall  find 
that  instrumental  music  is  positively  condemned. 
Thus,  the  celebrated  Thomas  Aquinas:  "  In  the 
"  old  law,  God  was  praised  both  with  musical 
,;  instruments  and  human  voices. — But  the  church 
"  does  not  use  musical  instruments  to  praise  God, 
11  lest  she  should  seem  to  Judaize. — Nor  ought  a 


in  opere,  in  tcientia  scripturarum.  Qnamvii  sn  aliqnis  at  so- 
lent  illi  appellare  kakophdnoi  si  bona  opera  babuerit,  dolcifl 
apod  Deum  Cantor  est.     Sic  cantel  servm  Chruti  m  non  \<»\ 

ktifl  sed  verba  placeanl  qua?  Leguntur:   1  H « ^ .  l<>.  m  S 
tui  malm  qui  eral  in  Sadie,  ejiciatur  ab  his  qui  similiter  ;ii>  eo 

dentur,   el    aon    Lntroducatur   in  eoi  <|ui   de    Dei   domo 
•niiiiin'  fecere  populonun.'1 — Jerom.  in  Ep.  w.  19 

•  Vetui  lii  Patribus  consuetudo  vigd  hodie 

ubi  ;ni«liuiitur,  1 1 ■  <  ;m  .d<  -  moduli  et  dulcla  caotfc 

i  Caciunl  popuiorum,  convenientium  ad  mulceodai  sum  votibos  ef 

I   ( ' 


113 

;-  pipe,  nor  any  other  artificial  instruments,  such 
"  as  Organ,  or  harp,  or  the  like,  be  brought  into 
"  use  in  the  Christian  church,  but  only  those 
"  things  which  shall  make  the  hearers  better  men. 
"  For,  by  musical  instruments,  the  mind  is  more 
"  directed  to  amusement,  than  to  the  forming  of 
11  a  good  internal  disposition.  But  under  the 
"  Old  Testament,  such  instruments  were  used, 
"  partly  because  the  people  were  harder,  and 
"  more  carnal;  upon  which  account,  they  were 
"  to  be  stirred  up  by  these  instruments,  as  like- 
'-  wise  by  earthly  promises;  and  partly  because 
"  these  bodily  instruments  were  typical  of  some- 
"  thing."— 2.  2.  Quest.  91.  Art.  2.  ad.  4.* 

Others  of  the  schoolmen  might  be  quoted,  but 
conceiving  this  to  be  unnecessary,  we  proceed  to 
state  the  judgment  of  the  reformers. 

Pareus  in  1st  Cor.  147.  declares,  "  That  in  the 
"  Christian  church  the  mind  must  be  incited  to 
"  spiritual  joy,  not  by  pipes,  and  trumpets,  and 
;i  timbrels,  with  which  God  formerly  indulged 
"  his  ancient  people  on  account  of  the  hardness 
"  of  their  hearts,  but  by  psalms,  and  hymns,  and 
u  spiritual  songs. "f 


■  •  Neque  fistula  ad  disciplinam  est  adducenda,  neque  aliud 
aliquod  artificiale  Organum,  puta  Cithara  et  si  quid  tale  alte- 
rum  est;  Sed  qiuecunque  faciunt  auditores  bonos.  Hujusmodi 
enim  musica  instrumenta  magis  animum  movent  ad  delecta- 
tionern,  quam  per  ea,  formatur  interius  bona  dispositio.  In 
Vt  t(  ri  autem  Testamento  usus  erat  talium  instrumentorum, 
turn  quia  populus  erat  magis  durus  et  carnalis,  unde  erat  per 
hujusmodi  instrumenta  provocandus,  sicut  et  per  promissiones 
t«rienas;  turn  etiam  quia  hujusmodi  instrumenta  corporalia 
aliud  fi^urabaiit.*' —  Thomas  Aquinas,  2. 2.  Qucs.  9\.Mrt.  2.  ad.  4. 

t  u  In  Ecclesia  excitandus  est  animus  ad  Deum  et  letitiaru 
spiritualem,  non  tibiis,  tubis,  tvmpanis,   quod  veteri  durae  eer- 
vicis  et  stupids  mentis  populo'Deus  olim   indulsir,  sed    -. 
concionibus;  psalmodiis  et  hymnis.M — Pareus  in  1  Cor.  147. 

'    10* 


114 

Zepperus,  De  Leg.  Mosaica,  lib.  4.  says,  "  In- 
"  strumental  music,  in  the  religious  worship  of 
"  the  Jews,  belonged  to  the  ceremonial  law, 
"  which  is  now  abolished. — It  is  evident,  that  it 
"  is  contrary  to  the  precept  of  St.  Paul,  1  Cor. 
"  xix.  who  wills,  that  in  Christian  assemblies, 
"  every  thing  should  be  done  for  edification,  that 
"others  may  understand  and  be  reformed:  bo 
"  even  that  of  speaking  in  unknown  tongues 
"  should  be  banished  from  the  church:  much 
"  less  should  that  jarring,  Organic  music,  which 
"  produceth  a  gabbling  of  many  voices,  be  al- 
"  lowed,  with  its  pipes,  and  trumpets,  and  whis- 
"  ties,  making  our  churches  resound,  nay,  bel- 
"  low  and  roar."  And  the  same  author,  speak- 
ing of  this  practice  being  retained  in  some  of  the 
Reformed  churches,  in  direct  contradiction  to  the 
judgment  of  their  founders,  thus  expresseth  him- 
self: "  In  some  of  the  Reformed  churches,  these 
"  musical  instruments  are  retained,  but  they  are 
"  not  played  until  the  congregation  is  dismissed, 
"  all  the  parts  of  divine  worship  being  finished. 
"  And  they  are  then  used  for  a  political  purpose, 
"  to  gratify  those  who  seek  pleasure  from  sound 
"  and  harmony."* 

Molerus,  in  his  Prelections  on  the  150th  Psalm, 
says,    "  It  is  no  wonder,  therefore,  that  Mich  a 

*  "  Instrumentalis  musica  in  saeris  el  rultu  divino  populi 
Judaic!  ad  ccremoniaJia  M<»;uca  j><  i  timiit  qua-  nunc  abolita 
sunt — I'tut  sit  contra  pra'ccptum  el  nmilam  Paul]  factum  est, 
<|iii   |  Cm.  xix.  !2<).  vnlt,  ut  in  convcmilms   ecclesiasticis  ad  cdi- 

ficationem  omnia  fiant,   atque  alii  iatelligaiit  el   inforroentar, 
quo  quidem  aomine  linguas  etiam  fan  ecclesia  ibidem  rejicR,  nc- 
dum  confragosa  ilia  Organa  muaica  qua'  varium  vocum 
tum  efficient  et  templa  lituia,  tubis   el  fistulia  penonan 
perboare  et   reinugirc  fackrat — In  quibusdam  ecdesiii  I 
raatis  On;. ma  ilia  musica  retinentur,  non  autem  nisi  omnibus 
cultus  divini  partibufl  peractu  et  demisao  catu  ecclesiastico 


115 

11  number  of  musical  instruments  should  be  so 
"  heaped  together,  for  although  they  were  a  part 
"  of  the  *  Pcedagogia  Legalist  yet  they  are  not, 
"  for  that  reason,  to  be  brought  into  Christian 
"  assemblies.  For  God  willed),  that  after  the 
"  coming  of  Christ,  his  people  should  cultivate 
"  the  hope  of  eternal  life,  and  the  practice  of  true 
"  piety,  by  very  different,  and  more  simple  means 
11  than  Obese."* 

Erasmus,  who  was  certainly  a  friend  to  the 
Reformation,  complained  of  instrumental  music 
as  an  abuse,  and  pronounced  it  unsuitable  to  the 
gravity  and  solemnity  of  Christian  worship.  His 
words  are,  "  We  have  brought  a  cumbersome  and 
"  theatrical  music  into  our  churches ;  such  a 
"  confused  disorderly  chattering  of  some  words, 
"  as  I  think  was  never  heard  in  any  of  the  Gre- 
"  dan  or  Roman  theatres.  The  church  rings 
%i  with  the  noise  of  trumpets,  pipes,  and  dulci- 
"  mers  ;  and  human  voices  strive  to  bear  their 
"  part  with  them.  Men  run  to  church  as  to  a 
•;  theatre,  to  have  their  ears  tickled.  And  for  this 
"  end,  Organ-makers  are  hired  with  great  sala- 
"  ries,  and  a  company  of  boys,  who  waste  all 
"  their  time  in  learning  these  whining  tones. 
"  Pray  now,  compute  how  many  poor  people,  in 

pulsantur.  Ad  finem  politicum  propter  illos  qui  ex  sono  et 
numeris  oblcctationem  quandam  quacrunt  quibusque  huic  in- 
strumentali  musica  interesse  libet." — Zepperusy  de  Lege  Mo- 
saica,  lib.  4. 

Non  niminim  igitur  tot  musica  instrumentahic  coacervari. 
Quae  cum  pars  pgeda^ogia;  legalis  fuerint  non  sunt  hodie  iu 
Christianoram  cwtibus  mducendse.  Aliis  enim  mediia,  et 
umplicioribus  spem  vita)  a;ternre  et  pietatis  excercitiam,  post 
Christum  exhibitum  suos  colere  vult  Dominus. — Multru.s  in 
Psalm  W. 


116 

•  great  extremity,  might  be  maintained  by  the 
"  salaries  of  these  singers."* 

It  is  curious  to  observe  how  little  our  brother 
Si nns  to  have  attended  to  the  history  of  the  Pro- 
testant churches;  for  it  appears,  that  instrumen- 
tal music  would  not  have  been  retained  even 
among  the  Lutherans,  "  unless  they  had  forsaken 
"  their  own  Luther,  who  (by  the  confession 
"  of  Eckhard,  a  German  doctor  of  theology) 
"  reckoned  Organs  among  the  cjisigns  of  Baal. 
"  His  words  are,  Lutherus  organa  musica  inter 
"  Baalis  insignia  refert."\  And,  from  record,  it 
is  evident,  that  if  instrumental  music  is  used  in 
some  of  the  Dutch  churches,  it  is  decidedly  against 
the  judgment  of  the  Dutch  pastors.  For  in  the 
National  Synod  at  Middleburg,  in  the  year  J  5S1, 
and  in  the  Synod  of  Holland  and  Zealand,  in  the 
year  1594,  it  wai  resolved,  "  That  they  would 
"  endeavour  to  obtain  of  the  magistrate  the  laying 
"  aside  of  Organs,  and  the  singing  v:ith  then  in  the 
"  churches,  even  out  of  the  time  of  worship,  cither 
"  before  or  after  sermons.  So  far  are  those  Synods 
"from  bearing  with  them  in  the  worship  itself" 

As  our  brother  seems  to  lay  so  much  stress 
upon  the  practice  of  the  Church  of  Geneva,  where 
Beza  and  Calvin  had  their  chief  influence,  your 
committee  conceive  it  proper  to  give,  at  some 
length,  the  opinion  of  these  great  reformers. 

Beza  thus  expresses  himself,  "  If  the  Apostle 
"  justly  prohibits  the  use  of  unknown  tongues  in 


Op.  rosam  quandam  el  theatrical  muficam  in  ra 
induxiinus,  tumultuoaum  diversaniaa  rocnm  garritum,  oualem 
Don   ppinor  in  Grecorum  aui    Romanorum  theatru  unquam 
auditum  fauw 

■  v  ide  I'  'ia.  Tho. 


117 

"  the  church,  much  less  would  he  have  tolerated 
i;  these  artificial  musical  performances,  which  are 
%i  addressed  to  the  ear  alone,  and  seldom  strike 
"  the  understanding,  even  of  the  performers 
•;  themselves."* 

Calvin,  in  many  different  parts  of  his  works, 
gives  it  as  his  deliberate  judgment,  that  instru- 
mental music  ought  to  have  no  place,  in  the  pub- 
lic worship  of  God,  under  the  Gospel. 

1st.  In  his  exhortation  to  Charles  V.  concern- 
ing the  necessity  of  reforming  the  church,  he  says, 
"  Unless  we  intend  to  confound  every  thing,  we 
¥-  must  constantly  distinguish  between  the  Old 
"  and  the  New  Testament.  That  although  the 
"  observation  of  a  ceremony  under  the  law  might 
"  be  useful,  now  it  is  not  only  superfluous,  but 
"  absurd  and  pernicious. "f 

2d.  Calvin  elsewhere  declares,  "  That  instru- 
"  mental  music  is  not  fitter  to  be  adopted  into 
"  the  public  worship  of  the  Christian  church, 
"  than  the  incense,  the  candlesticks,  and  the 
"  other  shadows  of  the  Mosaic  law. "J 

Lastly,  In  his  Homily  on  1st  Samuel  xviii. 
1 — 9.  his  deliberate  judgment  on  this  subject 
is  expressed  at  length ;  where  Organs  are  par- 
ticularized by  him  as  a  profanation  of  the  word 

*  Si  Apostolus  merito  pereg  rinarum  lingnarum  asum  in  caetu 
Ecclesiastico  prohibuit,  multo  minus  sonos  illos  Musices  Har- 
monicos,  quibus  aures  solae,  iis  qua?  cantantur  nullo  modo,  ne 
ab  iis  quidcm,  qui  cantant  plerumque  intellectis  feriuntur  in 
Ecclesia  tolerasset. — Beza  in  Colloq.  Mompelg.  parte  2.  page  26. 

t  INisi  enim  omnia  velimus  confundere,  tenendum  est  semper 
discrimen  illud  Veteris  et  Novi  Testamenti :  quod  ceremonia- 
quarum  utilis  sub  lege  erat  observatio,  non  superilure  modo 
nunc  sit  sed  absurdce  quoque  et  vitiosa?. 

\  "  ]Non  aptiora  esse  Cultui  Divino  in  ecclesia  Christiana  in- 
strumenta  musica,  quam  sufntum,  luminarin.  aliasque  umbras 
i»\:ris  Mosaic 


118 

and  worship  of  God  under  the  Gospel.  His 
words  are, 

"  In  Popery,  there  was  a  ridiculous  and  unsuit- 
"  able  imitation  (of  the  Jews) ;  while  they  adorned 
"  their  temples  and  valued  themselves  as  having 
•;  made  the  worship  of  God  more  splendid  and 
11  inviting,  they  employed  Organs,  and  many 
"  other  such  ludicrous  things,  by  which  the  word 
"  and  worship  of  God  are  exceedingly  profaned ; 
"  the  people  being  much  more  attached  to  those 
"  rites,  than  to  the  understanding  of  the  Divine 
"  Word.  We  know,  however,  that  where  such 
"  understanding  is  not,  there  can  be  no  edifica- 
11  tion,  as  the  apostle  Paul  teacheth,  while  he 
"  saith,  'How  can  a  person  give  testimony  to  the 
"  faith,  and  how  can  he  say,  Amen,  at  the  giving 
11  of  thanks,  if  he  does  not  understand  ?'  Where- 
"  fore,  in  that  same  place,  he  exhorts  the  faithful, 
"  whether  they  pray,  or  sing,  they  should  pray 
"  and  sing  with  understanding,  not  in  an  unknown 
"  tongue,  but  in  that  which  is  vulgar  and  intelli- 
"  gible,  that  edification  may  be  in  the  church. 
M  What  therefore  was  in  use  under  the  law,  i>  bj 
"  no  means  entitled  to  our  practice  under  the 
"  Gospel,  and  these  things  being  not  only  super- 
"  fluous,  but  useless,  are  to  be  abstained  from. 
"  Because  pure  and  simple  modulation  is  sufli- 
"  cient  for  the  praise  of  God,  if  it  is  sung  with  the 
"  hear!  and  with  the  mouth  :  We  know  lhat  our 
u  Lord  Jesus  Christ  has  appeared,  and,  by  his 
"  advent,  has  abolished  these  legal  shadow*. 

"  Instrumental  music,  we  therefore  maintain, 
"  was  only  tolerated,  on  account  of  the  times  and 
"  of  the  people,  because  tliey  were  as  taw,  as  the 

11  sacred  Scripture  speaketh,  whose  condition  re- 
*;  quired  these  puerile  rudiment-.     But  in  Gospel 


119 

"  times,  we  must  not  have  recourse  to  these,  un- 
*•  less  we  wish  to  destroy  the  evangelical  perfec- 
"  tion,  and  to  obscure  the  meridian  light,  which  we 
'•  enjdy  in  Christ  our  Lord."* 

Whatever,  therefore,  may  be  the  practice  of 
some  Protestant  churches  on  the  Continent, 
whether  Lutheran  or  Reformed,  it  is  evident,  from 
the  clear  and  decided  judgment  of  the  great  foun- 
ders of  these  churches,  given  by  your  committee, 
in  the  very  words  of  these  eminent  reformers, 
that  instrumental  music  ought  to  have  no  place, 
in  the  public  worship  of  God,  under  the  Gospel. 

Perhaps  it  may  not  be  improper  here  to  take 
notice  of  what  has  been  considered  by  the  best 
informed  historians,  as  the  ancient  and  genuine 
opinion  of  the  reformed  Church  of  England,  re- 


"  Quare  fait  in  Papatu  ridicula  nimis  et  inepta  imitatio,  quant 
tcmpla  exoraare,  Dcique  cultum  reddere  celebriorem  existima- 
runt,  si  Orgrana  et  aHtt  istiusmodi  multa  ludicra  adhiberent : 
Quibus  raaxime  dei  verbum  et  cultus  profanata  sunt.  Populo 
externis  istis  ritibus  addicto  potius  quam  verbi  divini  intelli- 
^entine.  Scimus  autem  ubi  nulla  est  intelligentia  nullam  etiam 
rediikationem  esse.  Quumadmodum  Paulus  apostolus  docet, 
quum  ait,  quomodo  potest  idiota  reddere  fidei  testimonium,  aut 
quomodo  dicturus  est  Amen  ad  gratiarum  actionem  nisi  intelli- 
Lrat  ?  Quare  fideles  hortator  co  loco  ut  Deum  precantes  et  ipsi 
Psallentes  et  precentur  et  Psallant  intellisreutia,  non  lingua  pe- 
regrina,  scd  vulgari  et  uttelligibHi  :  ut  sit  In  ecclesia  a?dificatio  : 
Quod  itaque  fuit  in  nsn  le^is  tempore,  nullum  hodie  locum  apud 
mos  obtinet :  et  rebus  istis  non  modo  superfluis.  sed  inanibus 
etiam  abstinendum  est :  quod  sufficiat  pura  et  simplex  divina- 
ruiu  laudum  modulatio,  corde  et  ore  nostro  singuli  idiomate. 
SiquiAem  scimus  Dominum  nostrum  Jesum  Christum  apparuisse 
et  umbras  illas  lesrales  suo  adventu  dissipasse.  Musicam  itaque 
illam  instrumentalem  teneamus  tunc  ratione  temporis  alius  et 
populi  l'uisse  toleratam.  quod  essent  ut  pueri.  quemadmodum 
i  ^criptui-R  loquitur,  qui  puerilibus  istis  rudimentia  indige- 
rent,  qua;  hodie  non  sunt  ultro  revocanda.  nisi  pei  toitionom 
jclicam  velimus  abolere, et  plenam  lucemquam  i:i  Christo 
uno  nostro  consecnti  sumus  obscurare. —  Cab:.  Horn,  66.  in 
i.  xviii.  1 — 9.  p.  " 


120 

tative  to  instrumental  music.  In  her  Homily  ol 
the  place  and  time  of  prayer,  we  have  these 
markable  words :  "  God's  vengeance  hath  been. 
"  and  is  daily  provoked,  because  much  wicked 
"  people  pass  nothing  to  resort  unto  the  church; 
"  either  for  that  they  are  so  sore  blinded,  that 
"  they  understand  nothing  of  God  or  godliness, 
"  and  care  not  with  devilish  malice  to  offend  their 
"  neighbours;  or  else  for  that  they  seethe  church 
11  altogether  scoured  of  such  gay  gazing  sight-. 
"  as  their  gross  phantasie  was  greatly  delighted 
"  with  ;  because  they  see  the  fal>e  religion  aban- 
"  doned,  and  the  true  restored,  which  secmeth 
M  an  unsavoury  thing  to  their  unsavoury  taste, 
"  as  may  appear  by  this,  ihat  a  woman  said  to 
"  her  neighbour :  l  Alas  !  gossip,  what  shall  we 
11  now  do  at  church,  since  all  the  saints  are  taken 
"  away,  since  all  the  goodly  sights  we  were  wont 
Xi  to  have,  are  gone;  since  we  cannot  hear  the 
11  like  piping,  singing,  chanting,  and  playing 
"  upon  the  Organs,  that  we  could  before  r  But, 
11  dearly  beloved,  we  ought  greatly  to  rejoice  and 
"  give  God  thanks,  that  our  churches  are  delivered 
"  out  of  all  those  things  which  displeased  God  so 
"  sore,  and  filthily  defiled  his  holy  house  and  his 
"  place  of  prayer." 

We  find  also, that  the  thirty-two  commissioners! 
appointed  by  Edward  VI.,  the  mo>t  eminent 
men  then  in  England,  either  for  divinity  or  laif, 
complained  of  cathedral  singing,  and  advised  the 
laying  of  it  aside.  Their  words  are,  kk  In  read- 
M  ing  chapters  and  singing  psalms,  ministers  and 
••  clergymen  must  think  of  ihi>  diligently;  that 
"  God  is  not  only  to  be  praised  by  them,  but 
"  that  otlurs  are  to  be  brought  to  perform  the 
"  same  worship  by  their  counsel  and  example. 


121 

•  Wherefore  let  them  pronounce  their  words  dis- 
••  tinctly,  and  let  their  singing  be  clear  and  easy. 
14  that  every  thing  may  be  understood  by  the  au- 
;i  ditors.  So  that  'tis  our  pleasure,  that  the  qua- 
"  vering  operose  music,  which  is  called  figured, 
u  should  be  wholly  laid  aside;  since  it  often  makes 
i{  such  a  noise  in  the  ears  of  the  people,  that  they 
ik  cannot  understand  what  is  said."* 

And  it  is  a  remarkable  fact,  perhaps  not  com- 
monly known  by  the  advocates  for  instrumental 
music,  in  the  public  worship  of  God,  that  in  the 
English  Convocation,  held  in  the  year  1562,  in 
Queen  Elizabeth's  time,  for  settling  the  Liturgy 
of  the  Protestant  Church  of  England,  the  re- 
taining of  the  custom  of  kneeling  at  the  sacra- 
ment, the  cross  in  baptism,  and  of  Organs,  car- 
ried only  by  the  casting  vote.\ 

Burns,  in  his  ecclesiastical  law,  under  the  title, 
1  Public  Worship?  says,  "  The  rule  laid  down  for 
"  church  music  in  England,  almost  a  thousand 
14  years  ago,  was,  that  they  should  observe  a  plain 
M  and  devout  melody,  according  to  the  custom  of 
M  the  church,  while  the  rule  prescribed  by  Queen 
"  Elizabeth,  in  her  injunctions,  was,  that  there 
;c  should  be  a  modest  and  distinct  song,  so  used 
"  in  all  parts  of  the  common  prayers  of  the  church, 
"  that  the  same  may  be  as  plainly  understood  as  if 
"  it  were  read  without  singing.  Of  the  want  of 
"  which  grave,  and  serious,  and  intelligible  way, 
"  the  reformatio  legum  had  complained  before." 

From  these  quotations,  therefore,  from  the  Fa- 
thers, from  the  schoolmen,  and  the  reformers,  we 
are  entitled  to  say,  that  the  history  of  the  church 

*  Reform.  Leg.  de  Div.  Offic. 

I  Vide  Dr.  Henry's  Hist.  Stripe's  Annuls,  p.  363. 

11 


affords  no  countenance  to  the  introduction  01 
strumental  music  into  the  public  worship  of  God. 
That  it  was  not  admitted  in  the  first  steven  cen- 
turies, ran  never,  as  our  brother  affirms,  !)♦'  ac- 
counted for  by  the  poverty  and  the  persecution 
o(  the  church,  nor  by  the  calamities  and  convul- 
sions of  the  times.  For  even  supposing  that  Or- 
gans were  too  expensive  and  cumbersome  instru- 
ments, was  not  the  pipe,  the  cymbal,  and  the 
harp,  a  cheaper  and  more  portable  substitute  i 
Could  not  Christians  have  carried  these  along 
with  them  in  their  flight  from  city  to  city,  and 
hid  them  with  themselves  in  holes,  and  dens,  and 
caves  of  the  earth.  The  Jewish  captives  had 
their  harps  at  the  rivers  of  Babel,  and  why  might 
not  persecuted  Christians  have  \\<*>(\  theirs,  if  the  J 
had  thought  them  lawful,  even  in  the  most  dis- 
tressing scenes  of  the  ten  persecutions  ?  Had  they 
believed  instrumental  music  to  be  "  enjoined  in 
the  New  Testament,"  would  it  not  be  a  foul  as- 
persion on  their  character,  to  suppose  that  death. 
in  its  most  direful  form,  would  have  deterred  them 
from  the  duty  of  employing  it.  Every  person 
acquainted  with  the  history  of  the  martyrs  of  tin 
primitive  church,  must  know  well,  that  they  n< 
shrunk  from  a  single  article  of  faith  or  wor- 
which  they  believed  to  be  enjoined  by  d< 
authority.  Paul  and  Silas,  at  midnight*  in  the 
prison  of  Philippi,  sang  the  praises  of  God,  re- 
gardless of  them  who  could  only  kill  the  body, 
But  the  truth  is,  that  the  primitive  Christians 
considered  instrumental  mpsic  neither  as  lawful* 
nor  expedient,  nor  edifying*  If,  therefore,  at  least 
en  or  eight  centuries  did  elapse,  before  Or- 
gans, or  by  whatever  name  you  are  pleased  to 
call  thet  e  instruments,  were  introduced  into  Chris- 


tian  worship,  and  the  want  of  them,  during 
that  period,  was  never  regretted  by  the  church; 
it  is  a  most  decisive  proof,  that  the  primitive 
Christians  regarded  them  as  inconsistent  with  the 
purity  of  evangelical  praise.  Your  committee, 
therefore,  cannot  go  along  with  the  assertion  of 
our  brother,  "  that  it  was  ever  during  periods  of 
"  dawning  light  that  Organs  began  to  be  em- 
"  ployed."  They  consider  his  assertion  as  ra- 
ther problematical;  nor  can  they  well  compre- 
hend what  he  means  by  the  dawn  of  light  in  the 
eighth  century.  Its  light,  in  the  language  of 
the  poet,  may  be  considered  as  little  more  than 
"  darkness  visible."  But  whether  there  was  a 
dawn  or  not,  in  the  eighth  century,  and  whether 
King  Pepin,  who  devoted  that  Organ,  the  present 
of  the  Greek  emperor,  to  the  service  of  the  Su- 
preme Being,  (notwithstanding  the  heroic  soul 
ascribed  to  him  b}'  our  brother,)  perfectly  under- 
stood the  nature  and  spirit  of  the  Gospel  of 
Christ,  your  committee  cannot  positively  deter- 
mine: But  they  are  confident,  that  instrumental 
music  began  to  be  introduced  into  the  church, 
when  ignorance,  superstition,  and  the  love  of  ex- 
ternal pomp,  had  made  men  more  desirous  of 
having  their  ears  delighted,  than  their  hearts  im- 
proved,— at  a  time,  when  all  authors  are  agreed, 
that  Antichrist  was  already  come  into  the  world. 
When  our  brother,  therefore,  affirms,  that  Organs 
were  not  at  first  "  employed  by  the  authority  of 
"  a  papal  decree,  but  by  the  dictates  of  pious 
"  feeling,  prompting  the  enlightened  mind  to 
"  consecrate  the  labours  of  genius  to  the  devout 
"  exercise  of  praise;"  he  ought  to  reflect,  that 
from  a  desire  to  consecrate  the  labours  of  genius 
in  painting  and  statuary  to  the  service  of  God, 


124 

.  admiration,  then  devotion,  and  ai  laatwor* 
ship,  came  to  be  paid  to  images.  From  allow  ing 
pious  feeling  to  hurry  the  mind  too  far,  respect- 
ing the  manner  in  which  the  Gospel  should  be 
.lit,  or  the  service  of  God  performed,  we  may 
date  almost  every  corruption  which  has  disfigured 
Christianity.  The  conception,  that  we  should  be 
more  at  leisure  to  serve  God,  if  we  could  abstract 
ourselves  from  the  cares  of  the  world,  paved  the 
way  for  the  monastic  life.  The  conception  that 
we  never  could  mortify  the  body,  and  the  lusts 
thereof,  too  much,  gave  rise  to  penance,  and  its 
train  of  absurdities.  Mistaken  pious  lit  linn. 
therefore,  may  have  led  men,  in  every  age,  to  add 
many  extraneous  circumstances  to  the  worship 
of  God,  and  may  still  induce  Protestant  Re- 
formed churches  on  the  Continent  to  retain  them. 
But  wise  men  must  always  despise  that  pomp 
which  is  merely  designed  to  amuse  children  or 
the  vulgar.  With  Protestant  churches  abroad, 
we  have  no  bond  of  communion.  We  shall  ap- 
ply to  them  the  words  commonly  used  in  the  pub- 
lic evening  prayer  of  our  Presbyterian  worship. 
"  May  the  Reformed  churches  be  reformed  more 
•;  and  more!" 

3d.  We  shall  now  proceed  to  examine  the  third 
argument  adduced  by  the  minister  of  St.  An- 
drew's church,  containing  his  reason  why  instru- 
mental music  was  not  employed  in  Scotland  since 
the  Reformation,  and  his  account  of  thai  pteju- 
pleased  to  style  it,  which  still  re- 
mains against  it.  lie  affirms  that  it  arose  from 
the  peculiar  state  of  the  civil  government  of  the 
country,,  which,  during  the  whole  of  the  sixteenth 
and  seventeenth  centuries,  was  of  such  a  nature 
as  to  grant  no  Irisvrr  to  the  people  of  Scotland 


125 

to  attend  to  sacred  music :  but  that  the  tide  oi 
human  affairs  is  now  so  strong1,  the  hand  of  God 
guiding  the  progress  of  mind,  in  matters  relative 
to  the  improvement  of  psalmody,  as  cannot  be 
resisted. 

A  strict  and  accurate  attention  to  the  historj 
of  the  Church  of  Scotland,  will  indeed  authorize 
us  to  conclude,  that  our  forefathers,  in  matters  of 
religion,    were    often  tyrannically    used    by  the 
ruling  powers  ;  and  that  they  had  much  to  strug- 
gle with,  before  they  obtained  that  form  of  eccle- 
siastical polity  established  at  the  Revolution,  se- 
cured at  the  Union,  and  invariably  acted  upon 
since  that  time.    But  the  same  history  will  show, 
that  the  reason  why  instrumental  music  was  not 
employed  in  public  worship,  in  Scotland,   was, 
because  both  people  and  teachers  looked  upon  it 
as  the  offspring  of  Judaism,   and  abhorred  it  as 
a  relic  of  Popery ;  and  too  intimately  connected 
with  that  prelatic  form,  which  our  forefathers  ne- 
ver could  endure.    If  we  consult  the  Second  Book 
of  Discipline,  framed  in  the  sixteenth   century, 
and  the  Directory,  composed  in  the  seventeenth, 
we  will  find,  that  our  forefathers  entertained  the 
most  clear  and   distinct  ideas  of  what   they  es- 
teemed scriptural  and  evangelical  in  church  go- 
vernment, in  discipline,  in  doctrine,  and  in  public 
worship.     And   during   all  their  struggle,  from 
the  Reformation  to  the  Revolution,  either  with 
the  popish  or  prelatical  sovereigns  of  the  house 
of  Stewart,  the}7  never,  for  a  single  moment,  lost 
sight  of  these  four  great  branches  of  ecclesias- 
tical polity.     They  declared,  in  the  most  ener- 
getic terms,  that  they  were  reformed  by  Presbyters 
— that   they  were  determined  to  copy  from  no 
I  but  that  of  the  Scriptures,   as  understood 
11* 


126 

by  the  primitive  church.  And  from  their  con- 
duct, as  illustrated  by  the  Acts  of  Assembly, 
1638,  and  from  their  directions  to  their  commis- 
sioners to  the  Westminster  Divines,  to  be  found 
in  their  letters  published  in  the  year  1G44,  you 
clearly  perceive,  that  they  most  decidedly  and 
unequivocally  condemn  instrumental  music  to  be 
an  antichristian  mode  of  worship.  Why,  then, 
does  our  brother  endeavour  to  parry  the  argu- 
ment, by  saying,  "  that  the  aversion  which  the 
"  Scotch  nation  discover  to  instrumental  music, 
"  in  the  public  worship  of  God,  proceeded  from 
hi  the  circumstance  of  their  having  no  leisure  to 
,;  attend  to  it."  In  this  vague  manner  of  ac- 
counting for  customs  and  modes  of  church  go- 
vernment, you  might  affirm,  that  the  Magna 
Charta,  the  Bill  of  Rights,  and  the  Revolution 
Settlement,  so  much  gloried  in  by  the  inhabitants 
of  these  lands,  were  all  devised  and  obtained  by 
mere  accident.  The  truth  is,  the  Scotch  nation 
has  no  objection  to  instrumental  music  in  the  com- 
mon amusements  of  life.  It  has  been  allowed  by 
authors,  foreign  and  domestic,  that,  as  a  people, 
their  genius  is  much  more  musical  than  that  either 
of  the  English,  the  Dutch,  or  the  French.  But 
the  people  of  Scotland  abhor  the  blending  of  the 
inventions  of  men  with  the  worship  of  God. 
They  conceive  instrumental  music  inconsistent 
with  the  purity  of  a  New  Testament  church.  It 
is  not  strictly  true,  that  psalmody  was  almost  an- 
nihilated in  the  reformed  Church  of  Scotland. 
For,  in  direct  opposition  to  the  assertion  of  our 
brother,  there  is  the  most  satisfactory  evidence, 
that   from   the    Reformation,    down   through   the 

sixteenth  and  seventeenth  centuries,  our  church 
had   leisure   to   pay  attention  to   sacred   music; 


127 

schools  were  appointed  for  teaching  it;  and  even 
the  government  gave  their  countenance  by  Acts 
of  Parliament,  for  the  same  laudable  purpose. 
Thus,  in  the  6th  Parliament  of  James  the  VI., 
1579,  "  Our  sovereign  Lord,  with  advice  of  his 
"  three  estates  of  this  present  parliament,  re- 
ki  quests  the  provosts,  baillies,  council  and  com- 
"  munities  of  the  maist  special  burrows  of  this 
"  realm;  and  the  patrons  and  provosts  of  the 
;c  colleges,  where  schools  are  founded,  to  erect 
;i  and  set  up  arte  Sang  school,  with  a  master  suf- 
"  ficient  and  able  for  instruction  of  the  youth 
"  in  the  said  science  of  music;  as  they  will  an- 
"  swer  to  his  Highness  upon  the  peril  of  their 
"  foundations,  and  in  performing  of  this  his 
u  Highness's  request,  will  do  unto  his  Majesty 
"  acceptable  and  good  service."  Thus,  it  is 
matter  of  history  and  statute,  not  of  opinion  or 
conjecture,  that  both  the  church  and  the  civil 
government  of  Scotland  were  not  inattentive  to 
psalmody.  During  the  whole  of  that  violent 
struggle,  which  existed  for  more  than  a  century 
after  the  Reformation,  betwixt  Prelacy  and  Pres- 
bytery, the  people  found  abundance  of  leisure  in 
the  year  1592,  to  frame  the  great  Charter  of 
Presbytery.  And  betwixt  the  years  1638  and 
1660,  they  had  leisure  to  join  in  framing  a  Con- 
fession of  Faith  and  Directory,  and  leisure  to  put 
that  Directory  in  practice.  Why  then  does  our 
brother  affirm,  "  that  the  reason  for  instrumental 
H  music  not  being  introduced  into  the  public 
u  worship  of  God  in  Scotland,  proceeded  chiefly 
"  from  this  circumstance,  that  the  people  had  not 
"  much  leisure  to  attend  to  psalmody?"  Knox 
and  Melville,  Rutherford  and  Henderson,  men  to 
whom  we  owe  much,  were  of  too  active  a  dispo- 


128 

sition  of  mind,  and  too  anxious  to  settle  our 
Presbyterian  polity  upon  a  firm  foundation,  to 
leave  us  any  room  for  imagining  that  they  had 
not  attended  to  the  minutest  form  of  public  wor- 
ship. That  laboured  and  oratorical  description 
given  us  by  our  brother,  of  the  character  of  our 
Scottish  sovereigns,  from  the  Reformation  to  the 
Revolution,  may,  indeed,  serve  to  show  that  they 
were  a  most  unprincipled  race,  but  it  can  never 
serve  to  establish  what  he  means  to  prove  by  it, 
that  neither  the  people  nor  the  Presbyterian 
Established  Church  of  Scotland,  had  any  aversion 
to  instrumental  music  in  the  public  worship  of 
God;  but  were  hindered  from  adopting  it  merely 
by  the  want  of  leisure  to  attend  to  that  object, 
from  the  peculiar  political  situation  of  their  coun- 
try. Your  committee  beg  leave  to  call  your  at- 
tention to  the  following  remarkable  fact,  as  nar- 
rated by  Calderwood,  in  his  Church  History, 
page  674.  "  Upon  Saturday  the  17th  of  May, 
"  1617,  the  English  service,  singing  of  quiris- 
"  ters,  and  playing  on  Organs,  and  surplices, 
"  were  first  heard  and  seen  in  the  Chapel  Royal. 
"  On  the  25th  December,  same  year,  Mr.  Wil- 
"  liam  Cooper,  bishop  of  Galloway,  preached  as 
"  dean  of  the  Chapel  Royal,  where  there  was 
"  playing  upon  Organs:  So  the  bishops  prac- 
"  tised  novations,  before  ever  they  were  em- 
M  braced  by  any  General  Assembly,  and  thcre- 
"  fore  ought  to  have  been  secluded  from  voting 
*;  afterwards  in  that  matter,  and  condignly  ccn- 
u  sured."  Thus,  it  is  matter  of  history,  not  of 
opinion  or  conjecture,  that  the  Church  of  Scot- 
land was  not  inattentive  to  psalmody  ;  that  an  at- 
tempt was  even  made  by  the  king  and  his  cour- 
to  revive  the  use  of  Organs,    and  that  this 


129 

was  deemed  an  innovation  so  odious,  that  if 
shrunk  before  the  scrutinizing  and  commendable 
zeal  of  our  forefathers.  This  attempt  was  made 
in  the  year  1617,  when  Prelacy  was  established 
in  Scotland,  but  notwithstanding  all  that  royalty 
could  do,  the  attempt  was  abortive,  and  the  prac- 
tice never  extended  beyond  the  walls  of  the  Cha- 
pel Royal:  So  hostile  was  this  church,  even  in 
episcopal  times,  to  Organs  in  divine  worship. 
The  same  invincible  hostility  appears  in  the  year 
1644,  after  Presbytery  had  been  restored.  It 
continues  to  operate  from  the  Restoration  to  the 
Revolution,  during  the  time  when  Prelacy  had 
again  supplanted  Presbytery  in  our  native  land. 
It  bursts  forth  with  renewed  vigour,  from  the 
Revolution  to  the  Union,  when  Presbytery  was 
once  more  restored  and  settled  for  ever,  as  the 
ecclesiastical  government  of  this  part  of  the  United 
Kingdom.  This  invincible  hostility  procured  the 
Act  of  Parliament,  styled  the  Act  of  Security, 
and  the  Act  of  Assembly  against  Innovations,  a.* 
barriers  to  preserve  the  purity,  the  simplicity,  and 
the  uniformity  of  our  public  worship.  And  from 
the  Union,  down  to  the  present  moment,  the  pro- 
ject which  was  formed  a  few  years  ago,  of  intro- 
ducing an  Organ  at  Aberdeen,  and  this  late  at- 
tempt at  Glasgow,  arf  the  only  indications  of  a 
desire  to  undermine  the  invincible  spirit  of  our 
forefathers,  against  instrumental  music  in  the 
public  worship  of  God. 

Your  committee  most  cordially  go  along  with 
the  panegyric  which  our  brother  pronounces  upon 
our  venerable  reformers;  but  are  at  a  loss  to 
comprehend,  how  this  panegyric  can  be  recon- 
ciled to  the  opinion  which,  our  brother  says,  he 
lias    long   entertained,    relative   to    instrumental 


130 

music  in  die  public  worship  of  God.  {  K N  -  our 
brother  seriously  think,  that  Knox,  and  Melville, 
and  Rutherford,  and  Henderson,  were  of  his 
mind?  Knox  was  educated  under  Popery,  and 
habituated  to  the  use  of  Organs  from  his  infancy. 
He  had  travelled  on  the  Continent;  be  had  re- 
sided at  Geneva;  he  had  sojourned  in  England. 
All  these  circumstances  were  calculated,  as  our 
brother  knows,  to  form  and  cherish  a  predilection 
for  instrumental  music  in  the  public  worship  of 
God,  had  Knox  not  considered  it  as  unlawful. 

It  has  been  said,  that  both  Knox  and  Melville 
were  obliged  to  yield  up  their  own  judgment  to 
the  fury  of  the  times,  and  to  overlook  those  out- 
rages against  the  ancient  worship,  which  in  their 
hearts  they  condemned.  Granting,  that  they 
could  not  control  the  fury  of  the  populace  in 
its  first  paroxysm,  for  destroying  the  cathedral 
service,  could  they  not  afterwards  teach  their 
countrymen  to  discriminate  the  harmless  Organ, 
as  our  brother  terms  it,  from  the  idolatrous  image? 
Could  they  not  have  persuaded  their  country- 
men, if  they  had  thought  proper,  to  restore  the 
harmless  Organ  to  its  place  in  the  church,  as 
easily  as  they  persuaded  them  to  occupy  those 
edifices  which  had  been  polluted  by  Popery?  At 
least,  if  this  was  impracticable,  could  they  not 
have  regretted  the  perverseness  of  their  country- 
men, in  banishing  from  public  worship,  such  an 
enchanting  im  of  edification?    Hut  8 

and   Melville,  Rutherford  and  Hen 
not  one  word  in  its  behalf.     The}  alloi 
perish  unnoticed,  as  a  portion  of  that  tramp 
which  ignorai  superstition  had  foisted  into 

the  house  of  God.  Your  committee  are  neither 
conscious  of  religious  nor  political  antipathi 


131 

,<ied  in  prejudice,  operating  in  their  mind-. 
From  attending  to  the  history  of  the  Church  of 
Scotland,  and  from  the  studying  of  the  genius  of 
its  people,  they  are  perfectly  convinced,  that  the 
fixed,  determined  opposition  to  the  use  of  instru- 
mental music,  in  the  public  worship  of  God,  both 
in  the  established  church,  and  amongst  the  various 
bodies  of  Dissenters,  ariseth  from  legal,  political, 
moral,  and  scriptural  grounds — not  from  the  want 
of  leisure  in  our  ecclesiastical  patriots,  to  attend 
to  sacred  music — not  from  the  want  of  money  to 
purchase  such  instruments — not  from  the  want  of 
accommodation  in  our  churches  to  use  them. 
And  when  our  brother  is  pleased  to  say,  that  the 
times  when  the  Westminster  Confession  of  Faith 
and  the  Directory  were  composed,  were  times  of 
fierce  and  furious  war  against  the  Church  of 
England: — he  ought,  in  the  spirit  of  fair  and 
candid  reasoning,  to  have  added,  that  they  were 
times  to  which  Scotland  is  much  indebted; — 
times  in  which  a  bold,  free,  devout  and  thinking 
people,  opposed  an  attempt  to  enslave  their  con- 
sciences, and  entangle  their  affections  in  the  laby- 
rinth of  foolish  and  useless  rites  and  ceremonies, 
which  neither  they  nor  their  fathers  could  bear. 

4th.  We  now  proceed  to  scrutinize  our  brother's 
fourth  argument,  viz.  'That  the  Act  of  Security, 
the  Act  of  Union,  and  the  Act  against  Inno- 
vations, had  more  important  objects  in  view,  with 
which  Organs  have  no  concern — roundly  as- 
» Tting,  "  that,  that  cannot  be  illegal,  again-! 
;'  which  no  law  exists — that  cannot  violate,  which 
"  touches  not  the  constitution." 

Your  committee  cannot  help  saying,  that  the 

soning  of  our  brother  upon  this  part  of  the 

ct,  appears  to  them  very  vague  and  desul- 


ton.    He  at  one  time  applauds  the  spirit  of  tl 

5,  and  vindicates  the  character  of  our  Scotch 
patriots,  who  had  wisdom  to  frame  them',  com 
to  demand  them,  and  perseverance  to  obtain  them. 
At  other  times,  when  these  acts  seem  too  pointedly 
and  conclusively  to  oppose  his  favourite  measure. 
he  starts  off  at  a  tangent  from  the  legal  argument, 
and  striveth  to  amuse,  and  even  to  perplex 
with  subtle  and  metaphysical  reasoning  t;  about 
•-  the  nature  of  sound — about  a  mode  without  a 
"  subject — and  about  the  ever-varying,  ansub- 
"  stantial  nature  of  musical  tones;  exclaiming, 
"  that  our  national  uniformity  can  never  be  bro- 
"  ken  in  upon,  by  introducing  a  certain  quantity 
"  of  modulated  sound  in  the  pipes  of  an  Organ : 
"  And  to  attach  perpetuity  of  form  to  thin 
"  from  their  nature  incapable  of  uniform  duration, 
"  would  be  a  solemn  mockery  of  our  venerable 
"  legislators."  And  therefore,  what  the  wisdom 
of  our  church  and  state  has  anxiously  guarded 
against,  in  the  Claim  of  Rights,  in  the  Act,  1693, 
for  settling  the  peace  and  quiet  of  the  church, 
accompanied  by  the  Acts  of  the  General  As- 
sembly against  Innovations,  was  entirely  directed 
linst  the  hierarchy  and  the  Service-booh',  and  not 
against  instrumental  music.  And  in  no  less  than 
three  different  places  of  his  Statement,  he  has 
been  pleased  t<>  say,  M  That  the  respondents,  (of 

►urse  the  Presbytery,)  from  pot  attending 
"  the  spirit  and  meaning  of  these  laws,  have 
••  ;ir<_Liird  strongly  against  Episcopacy,  which 
"  our  brother  never  wished  to  defend;  and  that 
"  the  Presbyter]  have  pitted  ;i  sentence,  which, 
"  in  his  opinion,  got  -  far  beyond  the  object  they 

••  meant    to    condemn.      Thai    cannot   be    ill< 

"  against  which  no  law  exibi<,  not  could  exist, — 


133 

•  that  cannot  violate,  which  touches  not  the  con- 
M  stitution, — that  cannot  be  against  the  genius 
"  and  constitution  of  our  church,  which  habitu- 
*k  ally  recommends  to  her  people  the  singing  of 
"  the  Psalms  of  David:"  As  your  committee, 
however,  conceive  that  the  judgment  of  the 
Presbytery,  upon  the  7th  October  last,  was  well 
founded,  that  the  ratio  decidendi  was  legal  and 
constitutional,  and  that  the  prohibition  of  instru- 
mental music,  in  the  public  worship  of  God,  in 
all  the  churches  and  chapels  under  its  jurisdiction, 
was  a  wise  and  salutary  measure ;  they  shall  take 
the  liberty  of  stating,  at  some  length,  what  they 
conceive  to  be  the  law  of  the  land,  the  law  and 
the  constitution  of  the  Church  of  Scotland,  upon 
this  subject.  For  your  committee  believe,  that 
it  is  this  argument,  chiefly,  which  must  determine 
the  question  between  our  brother  and  us. 

Every  opinion,  founded  upon  the  history  of 
the  church  in  general,  or  taken  from  the  practice 
of  foreign  reformed  churches,  or  from  specula- 
tive notions  of  public  utility,  or  private  edifi- 
cation, must,  comparatively  speaking,  be  vague 
and  desultory; — but  the  argument  drawn  from 
the  law  of  the  land,  and  the  law  and  constitution 
of  our  own  church,  must  be  clear,  positive,  and 
conclusive.  To  this  argument,  your  committee 
wish  particularly  to  direct  the  attention  of  the 
reverend  Presbytery,  of  Dr.  Ritchie,  and  of  the 
world. 

When  James  VII.  had  forfeited  the  crown,  and 
when  his  throne  was  declared  vacant  by  the 
Scotch  Convention,  agreeably  to  the  Claim  of 
Rights,  made  by  that  Convention,  the  Presby- 
terian religion  was  established  by  William  and 
Mary;  and,  ugreeablv  to  the  same  Claim  of 
12 


134 

Rights,  Prelacy  is  for  ever  abolished  within  the 
kingdom  of  Scotland,  and  a  form  of  worship, 
differing  from  the  form  which,  at  that  time,  was 
exercised  by  the  established  Church  of  England, 
was  to  be  adopted.  Now,  though  the  use  of 
instrumental  music  is  certainly  not  enjoined  by 
the  canons  of  the  Church  of  England,  and  though 
it  is  practised  on  the  Continent,  in  churches  which 
are  not  Episcopal,  yet  it  is  well  known,  that  all 
denominations  of  Christians,  both  in  England 
and  Scotland,  did,  at  that  period  when  the  Claim 
of  Rights  was  framed,  consider  instrumental  mu- 
sic a  characteristic  of  Prelacy,  and  directly  op- 
posed to  the  vocal  music,  for  which  the  Reformed 
Church  of  Scotland  had  uniformly  contended. 
Therefore  we  conclude,  from  the  sweeping  clause 
contained  in  the  Scotch  Claim  of  Rights,  that 
instrumental  music  was  abolished  along  with 
Prelacy.  And  from  attending  to  the  history  of 
the  disputes  which  took  place  in  England,  be- 
tween the  Puritans  and  the  Episcopalian  church : 
we  are  entitled  to  say,  that  the  Puritans  con- 
sidered instrumental  music  as  intimately  and  es- 
sentially incorporated  with  the  public  worship  of 
the  prelatical  church.  This  will  be  found  to  be 
their  opinion,  as  recorded  in  Strype's  Annals, 
and  NeaPs  History  of  the  Puritans. 

When,  therefore,  the  Scotch  patriots  demanded, 
at  the  Revolution,  in  their  Claim  of  Rights,  that 
icy  should  be  abolished,  they  had  no  reserve 
in  behalf  of  any  one  part  of  it  whatever,  whether 
htial  to  it,  or  merely  accidental;  but  fairly 
and  candidly  meant,  that  not  only  Prelatical 
Government,  the  Liturgy,  and  Service-book. 
should  be  abolished,  but  that  likewise  kneeling  at 
the  sacrament,  the  sign  of  the  cross  in  baptism, 


135 

iind  instrumental  music  in  public  worship,  should 

share  the  same  fate.  But  as  some  form  of  wor- 
ship was  to  be  substituted  in  room  of  the  prelati- 
cal,  now  abolished,  the  people  of  Scotland  de- 
manded, with  great  earnestness,  in  their  Claim 
of  Rights,  that  the  doctrines  contained  in  the 
Westminster  Confession  of  Faith,  (including  the 
sum  and  substance  of  the  doctrines  of  the  Re- 
formed churches,)  and  that  the  church  govern- 
ment specified  in  the  great  Charter  of  Pres- 
bytery, 1592,  and  a  discipline,  as  practised  in 
the  purer  times  of  the  church, — should  be  granted 
unto  their  request;  all  which  claims  were  heard 
with  attention,  reduced  into  proper  form,  and 
enacted  accordingly.  Now,  your  committee  beg 
leave  to  observe,  that  the  outline  of  the  public 
worship  of  God,  to  be  used  in  the  Presbyterian 
Church  of  Scotland,  is  specifically  and  clearly 
stated  in  the  21st  chapter  of  the  Westminster 
Confession  of  Faith,  which,  in  fact,  contains  the 
sum  and  substance  of  the  Directory  relative  to 
the  reading  of  the  Word — to  prayer — to  preach- 
ing— to  the  celebration  of  the  sacraments — and 
to  praise; — the  five  distinct  heads  under  which 
the  Reformed  Presbyterian  churches  arrange 
public  worship.  The  Confession  of  Faith  was 
framed  in  the  year  1647,  confirmed  by  Act  of 
Parliament  1649;  and  therefore  it  is  certain,  that 
the  framers  of  it  had  distinctly  in  their  view  the 
Directory  for  public  worship,  approved  by  the 
General  Assembly  in  February,  1645,  and  con- 
firmed by  Act  of  Parliament  in  the  same  year. 

In  the  21st  chapter  of  the  Confession  of  Faith, 
we  have  the  most  decided  and  unequivocal  lan- 
guage, relative  to  that  part  of  public  worship, 
styled  praise—'1  Tt  is  the  singing  of  Psalms  with 


136 

race  in  the  heart."'  But  as  the  Wotmii: 
(  'onfession  of  Faith  is  not  only  the  standard  of  our 
church,  but  forms  an  Act  of  Parliament,  now  in 
force,  a  part  of  the  public  statute  law  of  the  land, 
your  committee,  therefore,  are  entitled  to  con- 
clude, that  our  forefathers  intended,  by  the  Claim 
of  Bights,  that  instrumental  music  should  be  con- 
demned and  abolished,  along  with  the  other  rites 
and  ceremonies  of  the  prelatical  church.  And 
that  the  form  of  worship,  "  the  singing  of  Psalms 
"  with  grace  in  the  heart,"  as  now  in  use,  should 
be  substituted  in  its  room.  Your  committee  affirm, 
that  when  our  forefathers  framed  the  Claim  of 
Rights,  they  had  the  most  clear,  distinct,  and  accu- 
rate idea  of  a  form  of  public  worship,  from  which 
instrumental  music  was  utterly  excluded.  A\ re 
next  proceed  to  analyze  those  other  Acts  of  Par- 
liament, relative  to  our  Presbyterian  church, 
which  flowed  from,  or  are  founded  upon,  the 
Claim  of  Rights. 

It  is  more  than  probable,  that  if  we  knew  even 
particular  relative  to  the  practice  of  the  clergy  in 
those  times,  that  some  discrepancy  of  opinion,  re- 
lative to  public  worship,  had  begun  to  appear  be- 
twixt the  year  1688  and  the  year  1093, — most 
likely  between  the  ministers  which  had  been 
ejected  at  the  Restoration,  and  now  restored  to 
their  kirks ;  men  who  may  be  considered  as  strict 
and  conscientious  Presbyterians, — and  some  of 
those  conformists  who  had  been  educated  under 
the  Episcopalian  Church  of  Charles  and  James, 
but  who,  by  taking  the  oaths  to  King  William, 
were  continued  in  their  ctiret,  and  who  had  a 
hankering  after  the  rites  and  ceremonies  of  the 
prelatical  worship  which  was  practised  in  Eng- 
land.— Thus,   in  an   act    passed,    109 J,  entitled, 


137 

An  act  for  settling  the  peace  and  quiet  of  the 
church,  "  Their  majesties,  with  the  advice  and 
11  consent  aforesaid,  statute  and  ordain,  that  uni- 
•;  formity  of  worship,  and  that  the  administration 
"  of  all  public  ordinances  within  this  church,  be 
"  observed  by  all  the  said  ministers  and  preach- 
"  ers,  as  the  same  are  at  present  allowed  and 
;i  performed  therein,  or  shall  hereafter  be  decla- 
"  red  by  the  authority  of  the  same;  and  no  man 
u  shall  be  admitted,  unless  he  subscribe  to  ob- 
11  serve,  and  do  actually  observe  the  foresaid  uni- 
"  formity."  But  where  is  that  form  of  worship 
specified,  but  in  the  Directory,  as  engrossed  in  the 
21st  chapter  of  the  Confession  of  Faith,  which  is 
the  "singing  of  Psalms  with  grace  in  the  heart?'5 
But  if  there  should  remain  the  least  dubiety,  con- 
cerning what  idea  is  to  be  attached  to  the  ex- 
pression, "singing  of  Psalms  with  grace  in  the 
"  heart,"  the  last  chapter  of  the  Directory  com- 
pletely explains  it.  "  In  singing  of  Psalms," 
says  the  Directory,  "  the  voice  is  to  be  tuneably 
"  and  gravely  ordered,  and  that  the  whole  con- 
:i  gregation  may  join  herein,  every  one  that  can 
"  read,  is  to  have  a  Psalm  Book ;  but  for  the 
ki  present,  where  many  in  the  congregation  can- 
"  not  read,  it  is  convenient  that  the  minister,  or 
"  some  other  fit  person,  appointed  by  him  and 
"  the  other  ruling  officers,  do  read  the  Psalm, 
"  line  by  line,  before  the  singing  thereof."  Your 
committee,  therefore,  with  the  most  perfect  confi- 
dence affirm,  that  the  uniformity  in  public  wor- 
ship, enjoined  by  the  Acts  1693,  among  other 
tilings,  signifies  the  singing  of  Psalms  with  the 
voice  alone. 

Had  the  kingdom  of  Scotland  remained  an  in- 
dependent kingdom,  possessing  a  separate  par- 
12* 


138 

liament,  as  it  possessed  distinct  laws,  and  a  sepa- 
rate ecclesiastical  establishment,  it  is -probable, 
that  the  Scotch  nation  would  have  been  com- 
pletely satisfied  with  the  regulations  and  act- 
already  quoted,  in  favour  of  its  worship,  doctrine, 
discipline,  and  government;  seeing  that  there 
was  but  little  danger  now,  of  its  form  of  worship 
being  corrupted,  or  altered  by  its  own  inhabi- 
tants. But,  as  there  was  a  plan  in  agitation, 
for  a  union  of  the  two  kingdoms  under  one  par- 
liament, the  people  of  Scotland  foresaw,  that,  if 
this  union  took  place,  there  would  be  greater  in- 
tercourse, than  formerly,  betwixt  the  two  nations. 
Besides,  from  the  circumstance  of  our  legislators 
being  called  upon  to  reside  occasionally  in  a 
country  where  the  prelatical  form  of  worship 
was  established,  and  from  the  obligation  of  obey- 
ing the  Test  Act,  before  they  could  enjoy  the 
public  offices  of  the  state,  there  might  be  some 
risk  that  our  Presbyterian  mode  of  worship  would, 
by  degress,  and  imperceptibly,  come  not  only  to 
be  corrupted,  but  altered.  The  nation,  therefore, 
became  exceedingly  jealous,  lest  the  Union,  so 
much  desired  by  government,  should  prove  preju- 
dicial to  the  form  and  purity  of  our  Presbyterian 
worship.  Accordingly,  in  Queen  Anne's  first 
parliament,  it  is  enacted,  "  that  it  shall  be  high 
"  treason,  in  any  of  the  subjects  of  this  kingdom, 
"  to  quarrel,  impugn,  or  endeavour  by  fflritiag, 
"  or  advised  speaking,  or  other  open  act  or  deed, 
"  to  alter  or  innovate  the  Claim  of  Rights,  or 
"  an\  article  thereof."  Most  likely,  this  act  was 
passed,  in  order  to  crush  the  rash  hopes  which 
the  Nonjurant  Church  of  Scotland  was  indulging, 
that  the  Union  would  gradually  introduce  pre- 
latical worship.     When,  therefore,  in  1705,  the 


139 

Parliament  of  Scotland  took  into  their  conside- 
ration, with  what  earnestness  the  Queen's  Ma- 
jesty had  recommended  a  Union  betwixt  her  two 
independent  kingdoms,  and  that  commissioners 
were  now  appointed  for  the  purpose  of  treating; 
they  expressly  enjoin,  "  that  the  Scotch  Com- 
"  missioners  shall  not  treat  of,  or  concerning  any 
11  alteration  of,  the  worship  of  the  church  of  this 
i;  kingdom,  as  now  by  law  established"  This 
clause,  therefore,  most  certainly  had  in  view  the 
form  of  worship  expressed  in  the  Director}7,  en- 
grossed in  the  21st  chapter  of  the  Confession  of 
Faith,  founded  upon  the  Claim  of  Rights,  and 
ordered  to  be  uniformly  observed  in  all  the  es- 
tablished churches  of  the  land,  and  approved  b}r 
the  act,  1693,  and  ratified  by  the  act  of  Assembly, 
1705.  Accordingly,  in  the  next  session  of  parlia- 
ment, 1706,  in  pursuance  of  these  principles  and 
views  of  our  forefathers,  the  celebrated  Act  of 
Security  was  passed,  containing  these  words, 
"  That  the  form  and  purity  of  worship,  presently 
"  it*  use  within  this  church,  shall  remain  and  con- 
"  tinue  unalterable"  And  in  order  to  avoid  all 
ambiguity,  the  expressions  in  the  act  are  varied, 
that  the  one  may  be  a  clear  and  distinct  com- 
ment upon  the  other. 

In  the  first  clause  of  the  act,  the  words  are,  as 
presently  professed  within  this  kingdom;  and  then 
it  adds,  "  as  now  by  law  established;"  then  it 
adds,  "  as  presently  in  use  in  this  church;"  and  in 
the  clause  which  ordains  the  same  to  be  observed 
by  all  regents  and  masters,  in  every  university, 
the  words  are,  they  "  shall  practise  and  conform 
"  themselves  to  the  worship  presently  in  use  in  thi^s 
"  church"  And  it  is  farther  enacted,  that  the 
sovereigns,  on  their  accession  to  the  crown,  shall 


140 

swear  and  subscribe  to  maintain,  and  prea 
inviolably,  the  worship,  discipline,  rights  and 
privileges  of  this  church,  as  above  established  by 
the  law  of  this  kingdom,  in  prosecution  of  the 
Claim  of  Rights;  and  it  is  likewise  statnted  and 
ordained,  "  that  this  act  of  parliament  shall  be 
11  held  as  an  essential  condition  of  any  union  to 
11  be  concluded  betwixt  the  two  kingdoms,  ivitk- 
"  out  any  alteration  thereof,  or  any  derogation 
"  thereto,  in  any  sort,  for  ever;"  all  of  which 
clauses  were  engrossed  in  that  act,  styled  the 
Treaty  of  Union,  and  now  considered  as  the 
public  law  of  the  land,  for  a  century  past. 

Now,  when  you  analyze  the  counterpart  of  this 
act,  as  passed  by  the  English  parliament,  for  the 
security  of  their  church,  before  they  allowed  their 
commissioners  to  treat  of  any  union;  when  yon 
observe  the  jealousy  expressed  by  their  parlia- 
ment for  the  preservation  of  their  form  of  wor- 
ship, and  the  accurate  manner  in  which  they  de- 
scribe that  form,  you  cannot  hesitate  a  moment 
in  concluding,  that  tlie  Scotch  patriots,  at  leas^ 
equally  enlightened,  and  equally  zealous  with 
their  English  neighbours,  had  a  clear,  accurate, 
and  precise  idea  of  what  was  meant  by  the  form 
and  purity  of  public  worship  then  in  use  in 
Scotland. 

The  English,  attached  to  the  worship,  disci- 
pline, and  government  of  the  ecclesiastical  es- 
tablishment of  their  own  country,  enact,  that  their 
commissioners,  "  shall  not  so  much  as  treat  of 
"  concerning  any  alteration  of  the  Liturgy,  Rites, 
"  and  Ceremonies  of  the  Prelatical  Church, 
"  by  law  confirmed;"  quoting  the  13th  of  Queen 
Elizabeth,  and  the  13th  of  King  Charles  II., 
which  acts  the  king  is  sworn  to  observe   at  hi> 


Ill 

coronation.  Too  many  people,  by  not  attending 
exactly  to  the  state  of  the  religious  establishments 
in  the  two  different  countries,  at  the  time  of  the 
Union — two  independent  kingdoms,  under  one 
sovereign,  each  jealous  of  the  other;  the  south- 
ern part  of  the  island  remembering  with  disgust 
what  they  had  seen  practised  under  the  govern- 
ment of  Cromwell;  and  the  northern,  recollecting 
with  horror,  what  they  had  suffered  under  the 
episcopal  administration  of  Charles  II. — have 
formed  partial  and  erroneous  views  concerning 
the  spirit  of  the  Acts  of  Security  of  the  two  dif- 
ferent countries,  at  the  time  of  the  Union.  While 
each  nation  was  exceedingly  jealous  that  no 
alteration  should  take  place  in  their  own  form  of 
worship,  it  was  not  necessary  that  they  should  step 
beyond  their  proper  ground,  and,  verbatim  ei  lite- 
ratim,  condemn  the  practice  of  their  neighbours, 
who  were  now  to  be  connected  by  an  incorpo- 
rating union,  under  one  parliament.  While  the 
English  nation  expressly  enact,  that  no  alteration 
should  take  place  in  their  Liturgy,  rites  and  cere- 
monies, as  by  law  established,  they  would  con- 
sider it  as  both  injudicious  and  indelicate,  to  con- 
demn our  Directory,  our  Presbyterian  worship, 
and  our  Confession  of  Faith,  in  open  and  avowed 
expressions.  Still,  however,  if  in  the  present  day 
any  English  bishop  should,  of  his  own  accord, 
attempt  to  introduce  the  Presbyterian  form  of 
worship  into  the  established  Church  of  England, 
your  committee  have  no  hesitation  in  saying,  that 
it  would  be  contrary  to  the  express  law  of  the 
land.  By  parity  of  reasoning,  though  instru- 
mental music,  in  the  worship  of  God,  is  not, 
totidem  verbis,  condemned  or  forbidden  in  our 
Act  of  Security,  out  of  regard  to  the  feelings  of 


142 

ihe  Church  of  England,  still,  as  in  thai  act,  the 

form  and  purity  of  worship  then  in  use  in  Scotland, 
is  to  remain  unalterable;  will  any  man,  there- 
fore, pretend  to  say,  that  if  instrumental  music 
shall  be  attempted  to  be  introduced  into  our  pub- 
lic worship,  that  it  is  not  contrary  to  the  law  of 
this  part  of  the  United  Kingdom?  That  very 
form  of  worship,  then  in  practice,  was  to  continue 
in  all  time  coming.  Now,  it  is  known  to  the  whole 
world,  that  betwixt  the  Revolution  and  the  Union 
of  the  two  kingdoms,  the  singing  of  the  praises 
of  God,  in  public  worship,  with  the  voice  alone, 
was  the  use  and  practice  of  the  established 
Church  of  Scotland. 

Your  committee  has  been  at  the  more  pains  to 
illustrate  the  Scotch  Act  of  Security,  as  they  ap- 
prehend that  both  their  brother  and  the  congre- 
gation of  St.  Andrew's,  have  allowed  their  judg- 
ments to  be  misled  in  this  question,  by  a  mere 
quibble;  conceiving,  because  they  did  not  read  in 
the  act  that  instrumental  music  was  forbidden,  to- 
tidem  verbis,  therefore,  that  there  is  no  law  against 
it;  but  your  committee  maintain,  that  they  have 
not  interpreted  the  Act  of  Security  more  strictly, 
than  its  history,  spirit,  and  enactments  will  jus- 
tify, agreeably  to  the  authorised  interpretation  of 
any  public  act  relative  to  privilege.  When  a  po- 
sitive defined  practice  is  commanded  to  be  ob- 

<  (1  by  any  class  of  men,  any  other  pra*  I 
altering  the  former,  is  most  certainly  prohibited 
by  the  spirit  of  tlr.it  act,  though  not  expre 
in  words:  and  therefore,  if  the  form  of  wor- 
ship in  use  and  practice  at  the  Union  was  to 
continue  unalterable  in  all  time  coming,  instru- 
mental music  is  most  clearly,  and  to  all  intents 
md  purposes,  forbidden  and  condemned.     Vnd 


143 

the  civil  magistrate  hath  authority  to  take  order, 
that  unity  and  peace  be  preserved  in  our  church, 
and  that  all  innovations  in  public  worship  be 
prevented  or  reformed.  Such,  your  committee 
hold  to  be  the  law  of  the  land,  and  what  they 
are  confident  in  affirming,  that  neither  the  Impe- 
rial Parliament  of  Great  Britain,  nor  the  Ge- 
neral Assembly  of  the  Church  of  Scotland,  can 
alter,  without  infringing  the  civil  and  political 
constitution  of  this  part  of  the  United  Kingdom, 
as  understood  and  ratified  by  the  Treaty  of 
Union.  Surety,  then,  our  brother  hath  not  at- 
tended carefully  to  the  spirit  and  meaning  of 
those  acts  of  parliament  now  quoted,  when  he  so 
roundly  asserts,  "  that  cannot  be  illegal,  against 
M  which  no  law  exists — that  cannot  violate,  which 
"  toucheth  not  the  constitution." 

Let  us  now  examine  the  ecclesiastical  constitu- 
tion of  this  part  of  the  United  Kingdom,  as  spe- 
cified and  confirmed  by  the  acts  of  her  General 
Assemblies,  and  your  committee  flatter  them- 
selves, that  they  will  be  able  to  show7,  that  instru- 
mental music  in  the  public  worship  of  God,  is 
contrary  to  the  spirit  and  principles  of  our  Pres- 
byterian church,  and  that  the  very  bold  and  ex- 
traordinary assertions  of  our  brother,  contained 
in  his  statement,  are  erroneous  and  improper. 
His  words  arc,  "  that  cannot  be  against  the  spirit 
*;  and  genius  of  our  church,  which  she  habitually 
%i  recommends  to  the  people,  by  her  appointment 

*;  of  the  singing  of  David's  Psalms. Before 

•:  declaring  her  prohibition  of  Organs,  it  is  in- 
M  cumbent  on  the  church  to  expunge  from  the 
"  sacred  records,  those  passages  which  seem 
"  clearly  to  recommend  the  use  of  instruments  in 
M  worship,  that  thus  the  worshippers  may  be  de- 


144 

u  iivered   from   the  inconsistency  of  promh 
11  and  exhorting  eacli  other  to  do,  what  in  their 

"  hearts  they  resolve  not,  and  are  forbidden  by 
"  the  church  to  perforin." 

In  treating  this  part  of  the  subject,  your  com- 
mittee wish  it  to  be  understood,  that  every  esta- 
blished church  is  entitled  to  arrange,  m  the  form 
of  a  creed,  a  confession  of  faith,  or  a  catechism, 
her  explanation  of  the  doctrines  contained  and 
set  forth  in  the  sacred  Scriptures.  Thi<  w  a>  done 
in  the  earliest  times  of  the  church  of  Christ,  and 
has,  with  great  propriety,  been  imitated  by  the 
Church  of  Scotland.  Every  church  has  likewise 
a  right  to  settle  her  form  of  public  worship,  and 
to  commit  it  to  writing.  By  some  authors,  this 
writing  has  been  styled  a  Mitsai;  by  others,  a 
Liturgy;  and  by  the  Scotch,  a  Directory.  These 
creeds,  and  confessions,  and  catechisms,  and  di- 
rectories, if  once  recognized,  established,  and 
put  under  the  protection  of  the  state,  that  church, 
so  protected,  has  it  not  in  its  power  to  alter  or  in- 
fringe the  fundamental  principles  contained  in 
these  writings,  if  they  mean  to  live  under,  and 
claim  the  protection  of  civil  authority. 

1st.  It  is  true,  that  we  in  Scotland  acknowledge 
no  temporal  head  in  matters  of  religion.  We 
deny  the  supremacy  of  the  king  over  our  Pres- 
byterian church.  The  executive,  judicial,  and 
legislative  powers,  in  matters  purelj  ecclesiastical, 
are  vested  in  our  church,  foUowing  the  gradation 

t>f  her  various   courts;  but    still    she    must    1«  - 

late,  judge,  and  execute,  agreeably  to  her  Con- 
fession of  Faith,  her  Directory,  ami  Presbyterian 
government     These  are  fundamental  principles, 

icknowledged  and  protected  b}  the  state,  which 
every  minister  and  elder  is  sworn  to  obey:   and 


146 

which  the  civil  magistrate  is  bound  to  see  ob- 
served, in  the  most  fall  and  literal  sense. 

2d.  Nay,  so  well  understood  is  this  principle  in 
the  law  of  Scotland,  that  "  the  magistrate  has 
11  authority  to  take  order,  that  unity  and  peace 
"  be  preserved  in  the  church — that  all  corruptions 
u  or  abuses  in  worship  be  prevented  or  reformed, 
M  and  the  ordinances  of  God  duly  settled,  admi- 
11  nistered,  and  observed.  It  is  the  duty  of  the 
"  people  to  honour  their  persons,  to  obey  their 
%t  lawful  commands,  and  to  be  subject  to  their 
%t  authority;  and  as  it  is  the  proper  duty  of  ma- 
*'  gistrates  to  execute  the  laws,  it  is  their  right 
"  and  duty  to  execute  these  laws  which  secure 
"  the  uniformity  of  our  national  public  worship, 
"  as  it  was  practised  in  the  year  1707."  And 
this  they  may  do,  by  inflicting  civil  penalties; 
and  if  they  shall  omit  any  part  of  this  sacred 
duty,  they  must  answer  for  it  to  God  and  their 
country. 

When,  therefore,  we  take  into  our  considera- 
tion the  Directory  for  Public  Worship,  and  the 
10th  Act  of  Assembly,  1705,  receiving  that  Di- 
rectory; the  21st  chapter  of  the  Confession  of 
Faith,  and  the  Act  against  Innovations,  passed 
21st  April,  1707 ;  in  connexion  with  the  practice 
of  the  Church  of  Scotland,  for  at  least  a  hundred 
and  twenty  years,  following  out  what  it  believed 
to  be  the  constitution  of  our  Presbyterian  esta- 
blishment,— your  committee  aflirm,  that  instru- 
mental music,  in  the  public  worship  of  God,  is 
contrary  to  the  principles  and  spirit  of  the  Church 
of  Scotland. 

The  Act  of  Assembly,    1707,    against  Inno- 
vations, which  your  committee  are  afraid  their 
brother,  in  his  Statement,  has  some  how  or  other 
13 


146 

overlooked,  begins  by  observing,  "  That  the  m- 
"  troduction  of  innovations  in  tlie  worship  of 
"  God,  has  been  of  fatal  and  dangerous  eoase- 
kt  quences."  It  then  goes  on  to  state,  "  that  the 
M  purity  of  public  worship  hath  been  expressly 
"  provided,  by  diverse  acts  of  parliament;"  and 
after  intimating,  "  that  innovations  either  have 
"  taken,  or  are  about  to  take  place,"  therefore, 
u  the  General  Assembly,  being  moved  with  zeal  for 
ki  the  glory  of  God,  and  the  purity  and  uniformity 
M  of  his  worship,  doth  hereby  discharge  the  prac- 
"  tice  of  all  such  innovations,  and  order  minis- 
u  ters  to  represent  to  their  people  the  evil  thereof, 
"  and  instruct  the  commissioners  to  use  all  pro- 
11  per  means  of  applying  to  government,  or  other* 
"  wise,  for  suppressing  or  removing  all  such  in- 
k'  novations." 

In  conformity  to  this  act  of  Assembly,  the 
Church  of  Scotland,  ever  since  the  year  1711, 
have  peremptorily  ordained  the  following  ques- 
tions, among  others,  to  be  put  in  the  most  solemn 
manner,  to  every  minister  at  his  ordination;  and 
his  answers  to  these  questions  are  known  by  the 
name  of  his  ordination  vows. 

1st.  "  Will  you  practise  and  maintain  the  purity 
"  of  worship,  as  presently  practised  in  this  na- 
"  tional  church,  and  asserted  in  the  Act  against 
;;  Innovations?" 

2dly.  "  Do    you   promise   to  submit  your 
k-  quietly    and  meekly  to  the  admonition   of  the 
"  brethren  of  this  Presbytery,  that  you  will  fol- 
"  low   no    divisive  courses   from   the    established 
"  worship  and  doctrine  of  this  church?" 

And  in  the  Formula,  which  every  minister  sub- 
scribes at  his  ordination,  he  sincerely  owns  the 
purity  of  the   worship  presently  authorized   and 


147 

practised  in  this  church,  and  that  he  will  constantly 
adhere  to  the  same;  and  that  he  will  neither  directly 
nor  indirectly  endeavour  the  prejudice  and  subver- 
thereof. 

If  such,  therefore,  be  the  ecclesiastical  statutes 
of  our  church — if  our  acts  of  Assembly  and  For- 
mula be  not  mere  waste  paper — and  if  language 
has  any  meaning,  we  solemnly  and  positively 
affirm,  that  the  introduction  of  instrumental  mu- 
sic, into  the  public  worship  of  God,  within  the 
kingdom  of  Scotland,  is  contrary  to  the  law  and 
constitution  of  our  established  national  church. 

We  cannot  help  taking  notice  of  a  circumstance, 
which  tends  to  corroborate  what  we  understand 
by  the  principles  and  constitution  of  the  Church 
of  Scotland.  The  numerous  bodies  of  seceders, 
under  the  various  names  of  Covenanters,  Asso- 
ciate and  Relief  Synods,  which  have  left  our  esta- 
blishment, and  declined  its  authority,  were  surely 
at  full  liberty  to  indulge  the  humour  and  wish  of 
their  respective  congregations ;  yet  in  no  one  in- 
stance, has  that  wish  or  humour  led  them  to  in- 
troduce instrumental  music  into  the  public  wor- 
ship of  God.  Why?  Because  they  conceive  it 
is  contrary  to  the  principles  of  Presbytery.  They 
have  uniformly  adhered  to  that  mode  of  religious 
worship,  enjoined  by  the  Directory, — the  singing 
of  the  praises  of  God  by  the  human  voice  alone. 
This  attachment  to  simple  worship  is  so  strong, 
and  so  universal,  and  the  habits  connected  with 
it  so  predominant,  that  we  may  consider  it  as  the 
common  consuetudinary  law  of  the  country. 

5  th.  Let  us  now  proceed  to  analyze  our  bro- 
ther's fifth  and  last  argument. — He  affirms,  that 
the  Organ  "  was  introduced  into  St.  Andrew's 
••church  upon  pure  Presbyterian  principles,  and 


148 

"  that  no  law  exists,  or  can 

"  of  it  as  took  place  upon  the  23d  of  August  last: 
11  and  that  after  the  most  serious  attention  to  the 
"  subject,  he  cannot  discover  tlie  most  distant  ap- 
11  proach  to  any  violation,  either  of  the  purity  or 
11  uniformity  of  our  public  worship." 

His  mode  of  reasoning  upon  this  part  of  the 
subject,  your  committee  cannot  help  considering 
not  only  as  metaphysical,  but  also  tinctured  with 
something  not  unlike  sophistry.  The}  shall  ana- 
lyze his  argument,  syllogism  by  syllogism.  I J  i* 
says,  "  it  could  not  be  an  innovation  upon  the 
"  object  of  worship,  for  we  worship  the  one  God; 
11  — or  on  the  subject  of  praise,  for  we  all  sing 
"  the  same  Psalms; — or  upon  the  posture  of  the 
"  worshippers,  for  we  all  sit,  as  becomes  true 
"  Presbyterians; — or  upon  the  tunes,  for  we  sing 
11  only  such  as  are  in  general  use; — or  upon  the 
11  office  of  the  precentor,  for  he  still  holds  his 
"  rank,  and  employs  the  commanding  tones  of 
"  the  Oreran  for  guiding  the  voices  of  the  peo- 
"  pie." 

We  may  allow  it  to  be  perfectly  true,  that,  upon 
the  23d  of  August  last,  the  minister  of  St.  An- 
drew's, and  his  congregation,  worshipped  the  one 
God,  that  they  sang  the  same  Psalms  as  usual, 
that  they  sat  as  became  Presbyterians,  when  the\ 
praised  the  Lord,  and  that  the  precentor  held  bis 
place  in  the  desk,  &c; — yet,  after  all,  by  intro- 
ducing an  Organ,  as  an  appendage,  they  mani- 
festly made  an  innovation  on  the  form  and  purity 
of  our  public  worship,  in  direct  opposition  to  pure 
Presbj  terian  principle 

Such  conduct  was  not  igreeable to  pure  Pres- 
byterian principles,  because,  in  the  first  place,  it 
an  innovation  on  the  ordinary  external  form 


149 

of  worship.  For,  by  blending  instrumental  mu- 
sic with  the  human  voice,  that  the  congregation 
might  better  express  the  emotions  of  their  heart, 
the  simple  melody  of  our  forefathers  becomes  im- 
mediately changed  into  a  medley,  composed  of 
animate  and  inanimate  objects.  Of  course,  the 
very  external  form  of  praise  in  use  at  the  Revo- 
lution, is  no  longer  continued  unalterable  in  our 
Presbyterian  church. 

2d.  It  is  an  innovation  upon  what  our  laws  of 
church  and  state  denominate  the  purity  of  wor- 
ship. Man  being  a  reasonable  creature,  and  a 
reasonable  service  being  demanded  from  him  by 
God,  that  reasonable  service  cannot  so  properly 
be  performed  by  man,  as  when  he  useth  his  voice 
alone.  This  is  the  vehicle  which  God  hath  given 
him,  to  convey  to  his  Maker  the  emotions  of  his 
soul.  Musical  instruments  may,  indeed,  tickle  the 
ear,  and  please  the  fancy  of  fallen  man.  But  is 
God  to  be  likened  to  fallen  man?  Are  we  taught 
by  the  letter  or  spirit  of  the  Gospel,  that  inani- 
mate instruments  are  capable  of  conveying  to  the 
Father  of  spirits,  the  emotions  of  a  pious  and 
virtuous  mind,  animated  with  religious  joy,  filled 
with  religious  gratitude,  and  awed  with  religious 
veneration,  pouring  forth  the  varied  and  enrap- 
tured impulses  of  an  enlightened,  converted,  and 
sanctified  soul.  Organs  are  the  mere  inventions 
of  men,  played  often  by  hirelings,  who,  while 
they  modulate  certain  musical  sounds,  may  pos- 
sess a  heart  cold  and  hard  as  the  nether-millstone. 
You  may,  if  you  please,  style  such  music  the  will- 
worship  of  the  Organist,  but  you  surely  cannot, 
in  common  sense,  denominate  it  the  praise  of  de- 
vout worshippers,  assembled  in  the  congregation 
of  saints:   to  praise  their  God  and  Redeemer,  in 


150 

psalms,  and  hymns,  and  spiritual  songs,  singi 
with  grace,  and  making  melody  to  the  Lord  in 
the  heart. 

"  It  is  but  too  common  for  persons  to  deceive 
M  themselves,  by  imagining,  that  when  they  are 
~  greatly  moved,  and  almost  transported  by  the 
a  delightful  airs  of  music,  that  they  are  then,  and 
"  for  that  reason,  in  a  temper  of  mind  most 
"  pleasing  to  God,  because  pleasing  to  them- 
"  selves; — a  vain  imagination  indeed,  and  a  most 
"  unhappy  delusion;  for  men  of  no  piety,  and 
"  destitute  of  a  serious  spirit,  can  relish  all  that 
11  sort  of  pleasure,  and  perhaps  even  with  more 
"  satisfaction,  than  persons  of  a  more  virtuous 
"  character.  They  can  say  unto  God,  '  Depart 
u  from  us,  for  we  desire  not  the  knowledge  of  thy 
ci  ways.  What  is  the  Almighty  that  we  should 
11  serve  him  ?  and  what  profit  shall  we  have,  if 
"  we  pray  unto  him?* — yet  can  take  the  timbrel 
"  and  the  harp,  and  rejoice  at  the  sound  of  the 
«  Organ." 

When,  therefore,  dur  brother  asks,  (in  what 
your  committee  conceives  a  sneering  manner*) 
"  Does  our  national  uniformity  consist  in  nothing 
w  more  substantial  than  in  a  certain  fixed  quan- 
"  tity  of  sound,  beyond  which  no  congregation 
"  has  authority  to  pass? — What  is  the  subject  to 
"  which  this  uniformity  relates?"  Is  not  this  a 
species  of  sophistry,  which  we  should  not  have 
expected  from  the  known  good  sense  of  the  minis- 
ter of  St.  Andrew's.  But  we  shall  not  answer 
such  trifling,  by  opposing  sophistry  to  sophistry. 
Your  committee  shall  answer  it,  by  this  bold,  but 
plain  and  honest  assertion,  that  the  uniformity  of 

"  Job  xxi.   14,  lo. 


151 

our  national  worship  consisted!  in  the  following 
things: — 1st.  In  the  minister  reading  the  Scrip- 
tures, and  lecturing  upon  these  Scriptures. — 2d. 
In  preaching  to  his  congregation  from  a  text  of 
Scripture. — 3d.  In  prayer  to  God,  not  confined 
to  the  cold  and  lifeless  phrases  of  any  fixed  form, 
merely  of  human  invention. — 4th.  In  the  cele- 
bration of  the  sacraments  of  Baptism  and  the 
Lord's  Supper,  agreeably  to  the  words  and  com- 
mandment of  Christ  himself. — And,  lastly,  In  the 
whole  congregation  singing  the  praises  of  God, 
with  the  voice  gravely  and  tuneably  ordered,  as 
expressed  in  the  Directory. — These  things  com- 
pose the  uniformity  of  our  public  national  wor- 
ship : — not  a  certain  fixed  quantity  of  modulated 
sound. 

When,  therefore,  our  brother  indulges  in  such 
metaphysical  reasoning  as  the  following:  "  What 
"  is  the  subject  to  which  this  uniformity  relates? 

" That  there  can   be  no  mode,   without  a 

"  subject  to  which  it  adheres;  and,  shall  our  na- 
"  tional  uniformity  be  said  merely  to  relate  to 
"  things  unsubstantial,  ever  varying,  ever  vanish- 
"  ing,  even  while  the  ear  is  labouring  to  hear, 
"  and  the  mind  to  catch  them?  And,  to  attach 
"  perpetuity  of  form  to  things,  incapable  from 
"  their  nature  of  uniform  duration,  would  be  a 
"  solemn  mockery  of  our  venerable  legislators:" 
— your  committee  are  almost  tempted  to  say,  that 
this  mode  of  reasoning  is  no  better  than  solemn 
trifling,  though  assuming  the  garb  of  philosophi- 
cal acumen.  For  your  committee  affirm,  that 
there  is  a  precise,  marked,  and  fundamental  dis- 
tinction, both  in  point  of  form  and  substance,  be- 
tween the  praises  of  God  sung  by  the  voice, — 
the  mean  bestowed  on  rational  man,  by  his  Crea- 


152 

tor,  for  expressing  the  religious  sentiments  of  his 
heart, — and  a  tune  of  modulated  sound,  extruded 

from  a  musical  instrument.  Mankind  mu&t  he 
dull  indeed,  who  cannot  perceive  that  there  is  a 
fixed  and  eternal  difference  betwixt  these  two 
things,  which  no  metaphysical  reasoning  can  ever 
confound  or  amalgamate. 

With  respect  to  that  part  of  his  argument,  where 
our  brother  affirms,  that  he  is  countenanced  in  his 
opinion,  by  the  custom  of  admitting  bands  of 
singers  into  some  of  the  Presbyterian  churches  of 
Scotland,  your  committee  conceive  that  it  can 
avail  him  but  little.  There  is  no  innovation  here 
whatever  upon  the  external  form  of  worship,  for 
still  the  praises  of  God  are  sung  with  the  human 
voice  alone.  And  if  ever  it  should  happen,  thai 
this  custom  shall  induce  any  congregation  to  ne- 
glect their  duty,  in  joining  devoutly  in  the  praises 
of  God,  then  we  say,  that  this  custom  ought  in- 
stantly to  be  abandoned.  We  do  not  deny,  but 
that  bands  of  singers,  directing  the  public  praise 
of  God,  have  been  abused  :  and  we  certainly  gi\  e 
it  as  our  opinion,  that  if  ever,  at  any  time,  they 
shall  encourage  our  enlightened  congregations  to 
neglect  the  singing  of  psalms,  and  hymns,  and 
spiritual  songs,  and  to  sit  mute,  and  listen  to  the 
harmonic  warblings  of  a  band,  then  they  oil 
to  be  dismissed  at  once,  as  not  only  unpresbv- 
terian,  but  highly  pernicious.  But  the  person 
must  be  very  much  inclined  to  yield  his  judgment 
to  sophistry,  who  does  not  perceive  ;»  \;i>t  differ- 
ence betwixt  a  band  of  singers,  singing  the  praise* 
of  God  witli  the  voice,  and  completely  blended 
with  the  praises  of  the  congregation  at  large,  and 
an  Organ  tickling  the  tar  of  the  audience. 

In  the  attempt  of  our  brother  to  prove  that 


153 

introduced  the  Organ  into  St.  Andrew's  church, 
upon  pure  Presbyterian  principles,  he  desires  us 
to  attend  to  the  conduct  of  what  he  styles  the  pure 
Presbyterian  Calvinistic  churches  upon  the  Conti- 
nent,  which  employ  that  instrument  in  the  public 
worship  of  God.  Most  likely  he  borrows  his  ex- 
amples from  what  may  have  taken  place  in  Hol- 
land or  Geneva.  We  have  no  bond  of  union 
with  either  of  these  churches.  They  are  establish- 
ments totally  independent  of  us,  and  are  entitled 
to  chalk  out  a  plan  for  themselves.  On  the  other 
hand,  their  practice  can  have  no  authority  what- 
ever with  us;  and  indeed,  from  what  we  know7  of 
the  opinions  entertained  by  some  of  these  church- 
es, we  should  be  very  unwilling  to  consider  them 
as  a  proper  model  to  copy  from,  either  in  doctrine 
or  in  worship.  But  be  this  as  it  may,  having  a 
right  to  form  standards  for  ourselves,  your  com- 
mittee therefore  wish  that  our  brother  had  con- 
fined his  views,  in  this  question,  to  the  principles 
of  the  pure  Presbyterian  Church  of  Scotland, 
which  we  conceive  to  have  been  animated  by  the 
purest  principles  of  any  church  upon  earth.  "  In 
"  our  church  the  generous  spirit  of  liberty  breathes 
•;  with  universal  vigour,  and  the  noble  soul  of  the 
"  Reformation  animates  every  part  of  our  estab- 
"  lishment,  so  that  no  distinction  was  made  by 
"  our  forefathers  of  days  and  ceremonies  which 
;i  were  alike  destitute  of  Scripture  support.  Our 
"  church  believes  it  to  be  the  great  design  of  the 
"  Gospel  to  raise  the  Christian  worshipper  above 
u  the  airy  grandeur  of  sense ;  and  instead  of  a 
"  laborious  service,  to  introduce  a  worship  wor- 
11  thy  of  the  Father  of  spirits." 

Our  brother  is  pleased  to  say,  "  That  he  is  dis- 
"  posed  to  presume,  that  the  Presbytery  never 


( 5 1 

Chi  to  have  inquired  what  was  done  on  ilic 
"  23d  of  August  in  St.  Andrew's  church.     They 

"  conjure  up  to  themselves  some  horrid  prostitu- 
u  tion  of  sacred  things,  and  then  fight  against  it, 
"  Bspro  orii  ctfocis,  wielding  their  arm-  against 
"  a  shadow." 

Your  committee  know  perfectly  well  what  was 
done  on  that  day  in  St.  Andrew's  church.  They 
know  that  an  Or^an  accompanied  the  public  wor- 
ship of  God.  They  know  that  musical  instru- 
ments are  the  invention  of  men.  They  know,  that 
though  neither  authorized  by  the  New  Testament, 
nor  by  the  law  of  the  land,  nor  countenanced  by 
the  Presbytery,  his  ecclesiastical  superiors,  nor 
approved  of  by  the  civil  magistrates  of  the  city — 
that  the  attempt  was  made  to  introduce  a  musical 
instrument  into  the  public  worship  of  God,  which, 
since  the  Reformation,  hath  in  this  land  been 
considered  as  illegal  and  unconstitutional.  Your 
committee,  therefore,  know  perfectly  well  what 
was  done,  and  their  opposition  to  the  measure  hath 
arisen  from  the  most  complete  conviction,  that 
they  were  only  doing  their  duty,  when  they  nipped 
such  innovations  in  the  bud.  Why  then,  does  our 
brother  affirm,  that  the  attempt  was  made  accor- 
ding to  the  pure  principles  of  Presbytery?  Was 
not  the  Presbytery  of  Glasgow  the  radical  court 
by  which  such  an  attempt  could  be  sanctioned? 
But  your  committee  affirm,  that  this  ecclesiastical 
court  was  never  consulted  on  the  business.  In- 
deed, from  the  narrative  giv$n  by  our  brother, 
this  appears;  for  he  says,  kk  that  it  was  resolved 
M  by  the  minister,  and  a  few  heads  of  families, 
u  to  have  a  metering  once  in  the  week,  for  im- 
u  proving  themselves  in  sacred  music.  Finding 
im  that  this  proposal  was  relished  by  a  number  of 


155 

^  the  hearers,  and  that  they  gave  regular  attend- 
"  ance,  it  was  next  proposed  by  some  of  the  at- 
u  tendants  to  introduce  a  Chamber  Organ,  as  a 
ct  help  to  the  precentor  for  guiding  the  voices  of 
*;  the  singers.  The  Organ  was  introduced,  and 
k<  was  employed  regularly  one  day  in  the  week. 
11  When  we  were  thus  meeting  together,  as  mem- 
"  bers  of  one  family,  it  was  suggested  that  our 
11  edification  might  be  promoted  by  concluding 
i;  our  meetings  with  family  worship.  This  was 
fct  done,  and  in  praise  we  employed  the  Organ; 
"  the  people  present  were  highly  gratified,  and 
"  became  loud  and  urgent  in  their  requests  for 
a;  the  use  of  that  instrument  in  public  worship." 
All  this  is  gravel}*  related  by  our  brother,  as  a 
specimen,  we  presume,  of  the  pure  principles  of 
Presbytery.  Now,  even  from  his  own  statement, 
your  committee  are  bold  to  maintain,  that  there 
never  was  procedure  held  by  an  Independent  con- 
gregational society,  more  subversive  of,  or  in- 
compatible with,  the  pure  principles  of  Pres- 
bytery. 

It  can  hardly  be  spoken  without  exciting  a 
sardonic  smile:  "  A  few  heads  of  families  first 
march  in  procession  before  us — then  comes  a 
number  of  hearers — these  are  followed  by  a 
Chamber  Organ  and  precentor — all  these  compa- 
nies are  constituted  a  family,  who  join  in  family 
worship  within  the  church — employ  an  Organ  in 
praise — are  highly  gratified, — and  become  cla- 
morous for  similar  gratification,  when,  by  meet- 
ing on  the  Sabbath  day,  this  family  shall  resolve 
itself  into  a  congregation"  Is  there  the  most  dis- 
tant reference  here,  to  the  kirk-session  or  Pres- 
bytery, or  any  constituted  authority  in  the  Church 
of  Scotland:  Nor  were  even  the  magistrates  con- 


156 

suited  in  this  stage  of  the  business,  which  com- 
menced about  the  beginning  of  June  last,  though 
occasional  hearers  in  St.  Andrew's  church. 

Perhaps  our  brother  thought  this  would  have 
been  downright Erastianism,  and  inconsistent  with 
the  pure  principles  of  Presbytery.  For  lie  again 
gravely  tells  us,  that  "  he  conceives  it  to  be  his 
"  right  and  privilege  to  direct  all  that  concerns 
"  public  worship,  in  the  parish  of  which  he  i< 
"  minister,  independently  of  the  civil  power."  In 
this  assertion,  your  committee  conceive  that  our 
brother  is  mistaken.  No  parish  minister  has  any 
rights  but  what  he  derives  from  his  Presbytery; 
and  these  cannot  be  legislative  and  judicial,  they 
are  purely  ministerial.  He  is  enabled  to  perform 
ministerial  duties — to  preside  in  public  worship 
and  sessional  business,  according  to  the  rules 
of  the  church;  but  he  has  no  power  to  depart 
from  these  rules,  or  to  direct  in  any  of  these  ca- 
pacities. And  when  our  brother  talks  so  confi- 
dently of  his  title  to  direct  all  that  concerns  pub- 
lic worship,  independently  of  the  civil  power,  it 
would  not  have  been  amiss,  that  he  had  carefully 
perused  and  studied  the  language  and  spirit  of 
the  23d  chapter  of  the  Confession  of  Faith.*    He 


*  A  ridiculous  quibble  has  born  resorted  to,  in  order  to  blunt 
the  argument  drawn  from  the  28d  chapter  of  the  Confession  of 
Faith.  It  lias  been  averred,  that  by  the  «i\il  magistrate,  in 
this  chapter,    can  only  be  meant  the  kin  the   power 

of  waging  war  and  catting  lynods  is  ascribed  unto  him.     [i  it 
isarj  to  repel  Mich  a  quibble  bj  reasoning?  Who  does  not 

know,    that    all   the   executive    power   of   the  British  einpi 
Understood  tO  dwell  in   the    king,    and    to    emanate    from    him' 

not  a  common  summons  ran  in  his  Maj< 

well  as  a  declaration  ot  \\  at  '  Doei  OOl  hifl  MsjettJ  annu- 
ally deb  irate  whatever  power  he  has  to  call  synod-,  as  well 
as  to  be  present  at  them,   to  his  commissioner  in  the  G 

ral  Assembly?    Hm  it  not    been  understood,  by  the  most  urn 


157 

tfould  have  found,  that  the  law  of  Scotland  has 
declared,  That  it  belongs  to  the  office  of  a  magis- 
trate to  maintain  piety,  justice,  and  peace,  ac- 
cording to  the  wholesome  laws  of  this  common- 
wealth. He  hath  authority,  and  it  is  his  duty, 
to  take  order,  "  that  unity  and  peace  be  pre- 
"  served  in  the  church,  that  all  corruptions  and 
"  abuses  in  worship  be  prevented  or  reformed, 
"  and  the  ordinances  of  God  duly  settled,  ad- 
"  ministered,  and  observed.  It  is  the  duty  of  the 
"  people  to  honour  their  persons,  to  obey  their 
"  lawful  commands,  and  to  be  subject  to  their 
"  authority,  from  which  ecclesiastical  persons  are 
11  not  exempted."  And  as  it  is  the  proper  duty 
of  magistrates  to  execute  the  laws, — they  are 
bound,  and  it  is  their  right  and  duty  to  execute 
those  laws  which  secure  the  uniformity  of  our 
national  public  worship,  as  practised  in  the  year 
1707. — This  they  may  do  by  inflicting  civil 
penalties,  and  if  they  omit  any  part  of  their  sa- 
cred duty,  they  must  answer  for  it  to  God,  and 
to  their  country.  Your  committee,  therefore, 
have  no  hesitation  in  saying,  that  the  magistrates 
of  this  city  might  have  legally  and  constitution- 
ally ordered  their  servants  to  have  taken  pos- 
session of  that  Organ  which  was  used  upon  the 
23d  of  August  last,  in  public  worship,  in  St.  An- 
drew's church,  without  the  authority  of  the  Pres- 
bytery, until  a  satisfactory  pledge  was  given,  that 

nent  divines  of  our  national  church,  from  the  Revolution  down- 
wards, that  the  Judge  Ordinary  of  the  bounds,  or  principal 
magistrate  of  a  city,  hath  an  inherent  right,  as  invested  with 
constitutional  authority,  "  to  take  order  that  unity  and  peace 
"  be  preserved  in  the  church,  that  the  truth  of  God  be  kept 
"  pure  and  entire,  that  all  blasphemies  and  heresies  be  sup- 
"  pressed,  and  all  corruptions  and  abuses  in  worship  be  pre- 
"  vented  or  reformed." 

14 


J  53 

it  should  never  be  employed  again  in  a  similar 
manner. 

]>ut  as  our  brother,  in  his  Statement,  seems  to 
lay  ^o  much  stress  upon  the  averment,  that  the 
Organ  was  introduced  into  St.  Andrew's  church 
upon  pure  Presbyterian  principles,  your  com- 
mittee deem  it  proper  to  give  a  short  abstract  of 
what  was  the  real  progress  of  this  business. — 
About  two  years  ago,  application  was  made  to 
the  Lord  Provost,  magistrates,  and  council,  of 
the  city  of  Glasgow,  then  in  office,  "  that  they 
"  would  allow  certain  alterations  in  certain  seats 
"  in  St.  Andrew's  church,  that  there  might  be 
"  room  for  setting  up  an  Organ;  the  petitioners, 
"  at  the  same  time,  binding  themselves  to  defray 
i;  the  expense,  and  to  make  good  all  damn. 
u  which  might  be  supposed  to  ensue,  but  which 
i;  they  apprehended  could  not  arise  from  its  intro- 
M  duction." 

When  we  examine  the  letter  accompanying  the 
petition,  and  the  petition  itself,  containing  tin- 
extraordinary  request,  we  cannot  help  thinking 
that  our  brother  has  been  disposed  to  treat  our 
Presbyterian  patriotic  forefathers,  in  rather  too 
cavalier  a  manner.  He  speaks  of  them  as  men 
misled  by  passion,  and  as  an  ignorant  bigoted 
people,  labouring  under  prejudice;  language,  to 
no  more  of  it,  requiring  stronger  arguments 
in  its  support,  than  our  brother  lias  yei  been  able 
to  advance.  Before  the  Lord  Provost,  magis- 
trates, and  city  council,  returned  an  answer 
to  this  extraordinary  request,  they  asked,  and 
received  the  opinion  of  their  logal  assessor,  who, 
in   a   very  manly    and    candid    paper,   now  upon 

die  Presbyter)  record,  gave  il  as  his  judgment, 

"  that  the  introduction  of  Organs  in  our  churches, 


159 

"  would  be  a  material  alteration  and  innovation 
•;  in  our  external  mode  of  worship,  and  recom- 
u  mended  to  the  minister  of  St.  Andrew's,  and  his 
-;  congregation,  before  proceeding  farther,  to  ap- 
•;  ply  for  the  permission  and  sanction  of  the  ec- 
"  clesiastical  branch  of  our  constitution. " 

Your  committee  would  have  thought,  that  the 
refusal  of  the  magistrates  to  grant  the  request  of 
removing  the  seats,  founded  upon  the  opinion  of 
their  legal  assessor,  a  gentleman  so  well  known 
for  his  candour  and  constitutional  knowledge  of 
the  laws  of  his  country,  might  have  damped  this 
musical  mania  for  introducing  an  Organ  into  the 
public  worship  of  God.  But  our  brother  tells  us 
in  his  Statement,  and  to  which  your  committee 
beg  leave  particularly  to  call  the  attention  of  the 
reverend  Presbytery,  that  although  he  received 
from  the  Lord  Provost  an  official  letter,  upon  the 
22d  August  last,  now  upon  jour  record,  and  the 
purport  of  which  letter  was  to  dissuade  him  and 
his  congregation  from  making  the  attempt,  yet 
that  he,  Dr.  Ritchie,  "  did  not  shrink  one  mo- 
"  ment  from  what  he  conceived  to  be  his  right.'" 
The  Organ  accordingly  was  employed  in  public 
worship,  on  the  Lord's  day,  in  St.  Andrew's 
church,  upon  the  23d  August  last. 

There  is  here  a  little  ambiguity  in  our  brother's 
Statement,  which  your  committee  do  not  exactly 
understand.  Whether  did  Dr.  Ritchie  lay  the 
Lord  Provost's  letter  before  the  committee  of 
gentlemen,  upon  the  evening  of  the  22d,  or  not 
till  the  26th,  the  day  on  which  he  received  the 
Lord  Provost's  second  letter?  If  the  first  letter 
was  only  laid  before  these  gentlemen  upon  the 
26th,  your  committee  solemnly  declare,  thai  our 
brother  did  not  discover  proper  respect  to  the 


J  60 

<  ivil  power,  if  he  used  the  instrument,  alter  lie  re- 
reived  his  lordship's  first  letter,  and  before  he  had 
an  opportunity  of  submitting  it  to  his  musical 
council.  But  be  this  as  it  may,  the  naming  of 
three  gentlemen  to  wait  upon  the  Lord  Provost, 
and  the  sending  two,  twice  in  one  day,  to  request 
of  the  Lord  Provost,  that  the  civil  power  might 
no  more  be  seen  in  this  business,  was  a  piece  of 
conduct,  not  at  all  like  the  good  sense  which  our 
brother  has  displayed  in  the  more  private  con- 
cerns of  his  life.  It  was  apparently,  first  setting 
the  civil  power  at  defiance,  and  then  apparently 
requesting  them  to  shut  their  eyes  to  the  contempt 
of  their  authority. — Your  committee,  taking  all 
these  circumstances  into  consideration,  cannot 
help  thinking,  that  the  conduct  of  our  brother 
upon  this  occasion,  did  not  discover  proper  re- 
spect either  to  the  civil  power,  or  to  the  Pres- 
bytery of  which  he  is  a  member. 

Our  brother  surely  was  not  ignorant  of  the  of- 
ficial opinion  pronounced  by  the  legal  assessor 
of  the  city  council;  neither  was  he  ignorant  of 
what  is  contained  in  the  21st  chapter  of  the 
Confession  of  Faith,  relative  to  public  worship. 
Neither  could  he  be  ignorant  of  the  power  with 
which  the  civil  magistrate  is  invested,  to  preserve 
uniformity  of  public  worship;  nor  could  be 
pretend  ignorance,  that  about  two  years  ago,  the 
city  council  had  refused  to  allow  the  seats  to  be 
removed,  for  the  accommodation  of  an  Organ. 
Why  then  did  he,  upon  the  23d  August  hist)  au- 
thorize and  direct  the  employment  of  an  Organ, 
in  St.  Andrew  V  church,  in  public  worship,  taking 

the  whole  responsibility  on  himself,  as  the  director 
of  all  that  concerns  public  worship,  in  that  parish 
church,  of  which  he  is  minister?    A  line  of  eon- 


161 

duct  which  your  committee  positively  condemn. 
When  our  brother  received  the  first  letter  from 
the  Lord  Provost,  it  was  certainly  high  time  for 
him  to  have  stopt  till  once  he  got  the  authority 
of  his  ecclesiastical  superiors,  and  then,  legally 
and  constitutionally,  he  could  have  said  to  the 
civil  power,  When  you  interfere  with  public 
worship,  you  are  proceeding  ultra  vires.  When, 
therefore,  our  brother  sent  two  gentlemen,  twice 
in  one  day,  to  request  of  the  Lord  Provost,  that 
the  civil  power  might  no  more  be  seen  in  thi^ 
business,  is  there  not  more  like  something  of  a  de- 
sire to  dictate  what  the  civil  magistrate  olighi 
to  do,  "  than  a  sincere  respect  professed  for  both 
,;  branches  of  the  constitution." 

According  to  the  Statement  given  in  by  our 
brother,  relative  to  his  conduct  upon  the  22d, 
23d,  and  26th  August  last,  or  even  from  the  com- 
mencement of  the  business,  about  two  years  ago, 
;>id  defiance  to  any  man,  to  point  out  a  single 
Presbyterian  principle  in  the  whole  of  it.  Whereas, 
on  the  other  hand,  the  interference  of  the  Lord 
Provost,  was  strictly  Presbyterian.  It  was  the 
legitimate  exercise  of  that  formal  power  in  ec- 
clesiastical matters,  which  the  standards  of  our 
church,  and  the  laws  of  the  land,  uniformly  as- 
sert and  maintain. 

As  to  the  conception  of  any  Presbyterian  mi- 
nister  of  the   established    Church   of  Scotland, 
having  an  inherent  right  of  directing  all  that  re- 
spect- public  worship  in  his  own  congregation,  it 
i  iectly  wild,  visionary,  and  untenable.     No 
minister  has  a  legal  right  to  perform  a  single  ju- 
il   or  legislative  act,  without  the  sanction  of 
the  kirk-session;  and  no  kirk-session  \y> 
14* 


162 

to  innovate  on  the  general  laws,  and  universal 
practice  of  our  church. 

Instead,  therefore,  of  your  committee  admiring 
these  gradual  steps  which,  our  brother  says,  were 
taken  by  the  congregation  of  St.  Andrew's,  since 
the  1st  of  June  last,  for  the  purpose  of  improving 
themselves  in  sacred  music,  they  are  rather  dis- 
posed to  imagine,  that  these  gradual  steps  were 
intended  to  accustom  the  mind  imperceptibly  to 
innovation,  and  to  the  reception  of  instrumental 
music  into  the  public  worship  of  God,  in  this  our 
national  established  church,  without  surprise  and 
astonishment.  Perhaps,  if  the  Presbytery  had 
done  its  duty,  they  should  have  stept  forward, 
and  nipped  such  innovation  in  the  bud,  con- 
vincing both  our  brother  and  the  world,  that 
the  house  of  God,  in  this  Presbyterian  country, 
was  not  to  be  turned  into  a  concert-room.  But 
we  flattered  ourselves,  that  the  good  sense  of  our 
brother  would  have  kept  this  musical  enthusiasm 
within  proper  bounds.  We  were  disappointed. 
When  innovation  begins,  no  man  can  say  where  it 
will  stop.  A  man  may  perform  an  action  fraught 
with  consequences  the  most  pernicious  to  his  coun- 
try. It  may  proceed  from  the  most  complete  bona 
fide  intention,  on  his  part;  or  it  may  even  arise 
from  an  invincible  error  of  judgment.  Your  com- 
mittee do  not  wish  to  speak  harshly  upon  the  mo- 
tives of  any  human  being,  but  the  consequences  of 
OH  action,  affecting  our  ecclesiastical  establishment, 
they  are  entitled  to  investigate,  and  to  approve 
or  condemn,  as  truth  and  justice  shall  demand. 

With  respect  to  that  pompous  declaration  made 
use  of  in  the  Statement,  to  fthow  the  utility  of  the 
measure,  and  how  wonderfully  calculated  an  Or- 


163 

gan  is  to  increase  the  devotion  of  a  congregation 
of  Christians,  and  "  that  the  time  is  now  come, 
"  when  we  have  it  in  our  power  to  vindicate  our 
"  church  and  our  country  from  the  reproach  of 
"  neglecting  one  of  the  best  means  devised  for 
"  the  improvement  of  sacred  music," — your  com- 
mittee must  beg  leave  to  say,  that  they  entirely 
withhold  their  assent.  Our  brother's  argument 
is  a  mere  petitio  principii — a  mere  begging  of  the 
question — assuming,  as  a  principle,  what  remains 
yet  to  be  proved.  Your  committee  are  no  ene- 
mies to  instrumental  music  being  used  to  exhila- 
rate the  mind  in  scenes  of  conviviality,  or  em- 
ployed to  animate  the  soldier  to  march  with  ar- 
dour to  the  field  of  battle.  Nay,  they  even  allow 
that  the  poet  is  not  altogether  fanciful,  when  he 
says,  that 

"  Music  has  charms  to  sooth  the  savage  breast." 

But  still,  they  can  by  no  means  allow  it  to  be  an 
improvement  of  the  public  worship  of  God  in 
singing  the  praises  of  that  God  who  is  a  Spirit, 
and  must  be  worshipped  in  spirit  and  in  truth. 
Your  committee  affirm,  that  the  tones  of  the  hu- 
man voice,  while  they  are  the  most  simple,  are, 
at  the  same  time,  the  most  perfect,  the  most  accu- 
rate, the  most  pathetic,  and  the  most  sublime,  and 
the  best  qualified  to  convey  the  sentiments  of  the 
devout  heart,  in  solemn  praise,  to  the  Father,  the 
Son,  and  the  Holy  Ghost. 

Your  committee  have  heard  your  amateurs  and 
dilletanti  assert,  that  their  nerves  have  been  com- 
pletely overcome  with  the  powerful  tones  of  the 
Organ,  and  the  sublime  crash  of  instrumental  mu- 
sic in  the  oratorios  of  Handel.  Your  committee 
are  willing  to  allow  this  musical  effect,  but  they 


164 

believe  at  the  same  lime,  that  all  the  musical  in- 
struments that  ever  were  used,  can  never  produce 
upon  the  devout  and  contemplative  mind,  that 
sublime  and  pathetic  effect,  which  the  well-regu- 
lated voice  of  8,000  children  produced,  when 
singing  the  praises  of  God  in  the  cathedral  of  St. 
Paul's,  upon  the  recovery  of  our  good,  old,  reli- 
gious king.  Away,  then,  with  the  cant  of  an  Or- 
gan's being  so  wonderfully  calculated  to  increase 
the  devotion  of  Christians!  Your  committee  have 
sometimes  had  an  opportunity  of  listening  to  in- 
strumental music,  in  what  is  styled  cathedral 
worship;  it  might,  for  a  little  time,  please  and  sur- 
prise by  its  novelty;  the  effect,  however,  was  very 
transitory,  and  sometimes  produced  ideas  in  the 
mind  very  different  from  devotion.  "  It  is  but 
"  too  common  for  persons  to  deceive  them>el\e-. 
"  by  imagining,  that  when  they  are  greatly 
"  moved  by  airs  of  instrumental  music,  that  the) 
"  are  then,  and  for  that  reason,  in  a  temper  of 
"  mind  most  pleasing  unto  God,  because  pleading 
"  to  themselves;  a  most  unhappy  delusion  ;  for 
"  men  sometimes  of  very  little  piety  can  enjoy  all 
"that  sort  of  pleasure,  with  as  high  a  <r/> 
84  persons  of  a  more  virtuous  character." 

Your  committee  believe,  that  when  the  praises 
of  God  are  sung  by  every  individual,  even  of  a 
plain  unlettered  country  congregation,  (which 
has  been  spoken  of  by  some  persona  rather  in  a 
taunting  manner)  where  both  the  heart  and  the 
voice  arc  engaged,  the  effect  is  orach  more  noble. 
and  much  more  salutary  to  the  mind  of  a  Chris- 
tian audience,  than  all  the  lofty  artificial  Btraim  of 
an  Organ,  extracted  b\  a  hired  organist,  and  ac- 
companied by  a  confused  noise  o\'  many  voi< 
taught,   at   great  expense,    to   chant   over    what 


165 

their  hearts   neither  feel,    nor    their  heads    un- 
derstand. 

When  our  brother,  therefore,  bewails  the  want 
of  the  power  of  discrimination  in  our  countrymen, 
to  perceive  the  advantages  which  would  result  to 
religion,  by  introducing  instrumental  music  into 
the  public  worship  of  God,  we,  your  committee, 
rejoice  in  the  thought,  that  our  countrymen  will 
not  suffer,  when  compared  with  the  inhabitants  of 
any  country  upon  earth,  as  to  their  discriminating 
powers  of  what  is  useful  and  proper  in  matters  of 
religion. 

They  inherit  that  discriminating  talent  from 
their  forefathers.  It  was  a  legacy  conveyed  to 
them  as  purchased  by  their  blood,  and  they  will 
not  abandon  it  for  the  puerile  amusement  of  pipes 
and  Organs.  If  our  countrymen  have  not  Or- 
gans, and  wish  not  to  have  them,  they  have  Bi- 
bles, and  can  read  them; — they  have  churches, 
and  they  attend  them; — they  are  distinguished 
for  their  attainments  in  arts  and  sciences; — they 
can  study  the  history  of  mankind,  and  can  reflect 
upon  it; — and  they  know  well,  that  Organs  and 
instrumental  music  have  been  abused,  to  the  pur- 
poses of  voluptuousness  and  impiety; — they  know, 
for  Job  hath  told  them,  "  that  the  wicked  among 
his  cotemporaries  took  the  timbrel  and  the  harp, 
and  rejoiced  at  the  sound  of  the  Organ;  and  yet 
said  unto  God,  Depart  from  us,  for  we  desire  not 
the  knowledge  of  thy  ways; — what  is  the  Al- 
mighty, that  we  should  serve  him,  and  what  pro- 
fit should  we  receive,  if  we  pray  unto  him?"* 
And  they  have  read  in  the  book  of  Amos  the  pro- 
phet, of  a  woe  denounced  upon  them  "  that  are 

"  Job  xxi.  12.  14.  15. 


166 

at  ease  in  Sion,  and  who  trust  in  the  mounta.. 
Samaria;  who  put  far  away  the  evil  day,  and 
cause  the  seat  of  violence  to  come  near;  who  lie 
on  beds  of  ivory,  who  eat  lambs  out  of  the  flock, 
and  the  calves  out  of  the  midst  of  the  stall  ;  who 
drink  wine  out  of  the  bowl,  and  anoint  themselves 
with  the  chief  ointments."*  But  this  very  nu- 
merous description  of  men,  in  affluent  circum- 
stances, and  addicted  to  luxurious  habits, — our 
countrymen  have  read,  chanted  to  the  sound  of 
the  viol,  and  invented  to  themselves  instruments 
like  David.  And  they  have  also  read  in  the  book 
of  Daniel,  that  when  Nebuchadnezzar  dedicated 
his  golden  image  in  the  presence  of  a  numerous 
and  loyal  assembly,  "  that  they  all  fell  down  and 
worshipped  the  golden  image,  at  what  time  they 
heard  the  sound  of  the  cornet,  flute,  harp,  sack- 
but,  psaltery,  dulcimer,  and  all  kinds  of  music. "f 

Thus,  we  have  endeavoured,  step  by  step,  to 
answer  the  various  arguments  adduced  by  our 
reverend  brother,  the  minister  of  St.  Andrew's 
church,  in  his  Statement. 

We  have  in  the  first  place  shown,  That  instru- 
mental music  is  neither  enjoined,  nor  authorized, 
nor  encouraged  by  the  word  of  God,  to  be  u 
in  the  public  worship  of  Christia 

In  the  second  place,  That,  from  the  history  of 
the  church,    it   appears   that  the    Fathers,    die 
schoolmen,   and  the   greatest   of  the   eel 
condemned  it. 

In  the  third  place,  That  the  reason  assigned 
by  our  brother,  why  instrumental  music,  in  the 
public,  worship  of  God,  VT81  not  used  m  our  na- 
tional church — (viz.   that    it  arose  from  the  want 

•    \i  f  Dan.  iii    7 


167 

of  leisure  to  attend  to  such  things,  or  their  want 
of  money  to  purchase  such  instruments,  or  the 
want  of  accommodation  for  using  them) — is  nei- 
ther consistent  with  historical  fact,  nor  with  fair 
and  candid  investigation.*    Your  committee  have 


Whether  in  the  period  immediately  after  the  Reformation, 
the  public  devotional  music  was  an  object  of  so  very  little  atten- 
tion in  the  Church  of  Scotland,  as  our  brother  is  pleased  to  re- 
present, may  be  determined,  even  by  a  very  slight  inspection  of 
the  Psalm  Book  which  was  used  in  the  church  during-  that  pe- 
riod. In  our  present  version  of  the  Psalms,  there  are  six  varie- 
ties of  measure;  and  with  the  knowledge  of  six  different  psalm 
tunes,  a  congregation  may  sing  all  the  Psalms  which  it  contains : 
In  the  old  version  there  were  twenty-five  or  twenty-six  different 
measures,  which  implied  a  knowledge  of  psalmody,  and  a  mode 
of  singing,  which  could  not  have  existed  amidst  that  ignorance 
and  inattention  to  church  music,  which  are  supposed  then  to 
have  characterized  and  disgraced  the  Church  of  Scotland. 
Copies  of  that  Psalm  Book  are  now  very  rare;  that  which  most 
generally  occurs,  is  an  edition  printed  by  Andro  Hart,  1635,  and 
makes  part  of  a  volume  which  includes  Directions  for  different 
parts  of  public  worship,  as  agreed  on  by  John  Knox,  and  other 
eminent  ministers,  whose  recommendation  is  annexed.  So  much 
was  this  pan  of  the  devotional  service  of  our  church  an  object 
of  attention  to  those  good  men,  that  the  particular  tunes,  pro- 
per for  particular  psalms,  are  commonly  annexed  to  them  in 
the  musical  characters  of  the  time.  And  as  books  were  not  to 
be  had  so  easily  in  those  days,  as  in  ours,  an  ingenious  device 
has  been  employed,  in  order  that  one  copy  of  the  book  might 
accommodate  the  four  different  persons  who  sang  the  four  dif- 
ferent parts  of  the  music.  A  considerable  variety  of  psalm 
tunes,  set  in  the  different  parts,  make  a  portion  of  this  volume. 
Far  be  it  from  us  to  blame  our  reverend  brother  for  his  igno- 
rance of  this  subject;  perhaps  he  will  blame  himself  for  writing 
so  decidedly  upon  a  subject  in  which  he  must  be  conscious  he 
lias  been  at  little  pains  to  obtain  information.  He  may  perhaps 
uise  to  regret,  that,  upon  mere  hypothetical  reasoning,  he 
should  have  pronounced  such  a  severe  judgment  against  his 
countrymen  respecting  their  ignorance  of  psalmody  in  the  six- 
teenth and  seventeenth  centuries. 

A  pleasing  little  anecdote  occurs,  sufficient  to  show,  that 
eminent  men  in  the  Church  of  Scotland  were  not  so  ignorant 
of,  nor  so  insensible  to,  music,  as  the  representation 
is  in  our  days  would  imply. 
Robert  Boyd,  of  Trochrig.  was  principal  of  the  collage 


168 

proved,  that  it  arose  from  the  opinion  entertained 
by  our  Scotch  ecclesiastical  patriots,  that  instru- 
mental music  was  contrary  to  the  genius  and  con- 
stitution of  Presbytery  in  this  kingdom,  and  to 
the  word  of  God. 

In  the  fourth  place,  We  affirm,  that  from  at- 
tending to  the  Act  of  Security,  to  the  Treaty  of 
Union,  to  the  Directory,  and  to  the  Act  against 
Innovations,  all  confirmed  by  the  consuetudinary 
and  common  law  of  our  church  and  state,  acted 
upon  for  more  than  these  hundred  and  twenty 
years,  the  Presbytery  passed  a  just  sentence  on 
the  seventh  October  last,  when  they  gave  it  as 
their  judgment,  that  instrumental  music  was  con- 
trary to  the  law  of  the  land,  and  to  the  law  and 
constitution  of  the  Church  of  Scotland. 

And,  lastly,  Your  committee  have  shown,  that 
the  argument  advanced  by  our  brother,  viz.  That 
the  Organ  was  introduced  into  St.  Andrew's 
church,  upon  pure  Presbyterian  principles,  is 
supported  by  mere  metaphysical  and  sophistical 
reasoning,  only  calculated  to  mislead  those  who 
have  not  paid  sufficient  attention  to  the  subject.* 


of  Glasgow.  "  He  was  a  man  of  an  austere-like  carriage,  and 
M  yet  was  a  most  tender-hearted  man.  He  was  of  a  sour-like 
11  disposition  :  he  would  sometimes  call  me,  with  other  three  Of 
k-  lour,  and  lay  down  books  before  us,  and  have  us  sing  tunes 
u  of  music,  wherein  he  took  great  delight." — Livingstone's  Life. 

(Cm  \k  \<  TERISTICS.) 

IVe  believe  that  a  copy  of  the   above  Psalm   Book   is    in   the 
-ion  of  an  eminent  clergyman  of  this  neighbourhood, 
well  known  for  bis  scientific  knowledge  in  ever)  branch  of  the 
fine  aii- 

*  We  beg  it  nia\  he  remembered,  what  we  slated  in  the  com- 
mencement of  this  answer  to  Dr.  Ritchie,  that  we  have  been  all 

along  arguing  w  ith  a  minister  6f  the  chinch  of  Scotland,  bound 
by  the  tame  laws  of  church  and  state  which  bind  the   Prt 
tcry  of  Glasgow. 


169 

IT  your  committee  had  been  disposed  10  mea- 
sure out  to  their  brother  such  language,  and  such 
reflections  as  he  hath  been  pleased  to  make  upon 
his  ecclesiastical  superiors,  the  Presbytery  of 
Glasgow,  they  would  be  justified  in  saying,  that 
there  are  some  remarks  in  the  conclusion  of  his 
statement,  which,  in  politeness,  he  should  have 
avoided.  Thus,  "  Feeling  as  we  do,"  says  he,  "  the 
"  harshness  of  the  sentence  pronounced  against 
"  us,  we  have  confidence,  that  the  judgment  of  a 
"  candid  public  will  be,  that  guilt  has  been  im- 
"  puted  where  there  was  no  crime,  and  that  we 
;-  have  become  the  victims  of  a  prejudice  which 
u  we  wished  to  remove.  And  instead  of  receiving 
"  encouragement,  we  have  been  exhibited  to  the 
"  world  as  violating  the  law  both  of  the  church 
"  and  of  the  state,  while  we,  the  minister,  and 
"  elders,  and  congregation  of  St.  Andrew's 
"  church,  are  both  loyal  citizens,  and  steady  in 
"  our  attachment  to  our  ecclesiastical  establish- 
"  ment."  Your  committee  will  cheerfully  allow 
the  minister  and  congregation  of  St.  Andrew's 
all  the  benefit  of  this  pompous  encomium  passed 
upon  their  own  conduct,  by  one  of  their  own 
number.  We  cordially  approve  of  the  appeal 
which  our  brother  has  made  to  the  judgment  of 
the  candid  public.  For,  if  the  spirit  and  princi- 
ples of  the  fathers  animate  the  children; — if  the 
universal,  and  almost  uninterrupted  practice  of 
our  church,  in  the  midst  of  its  greatest  reverses, 
since  the  Reformation  down  to  the  present  mo- 
ment, except  in  three  solitary  instances,  (the  at- 
tempt made  in  the  Chapel  Royal,  1617,  by  the 
king  and  his  courtiers,  which  never  extended  its 
influence  farther  than  the  walls  of  the  chapel, — 
and  an  attempt  which  was  made  a  few  years  agor 
15 


170 

by  a  respectable  congregation  in  Aberdeen,  but 
instantly  abandoned, — and  this  late  abortive  at- 
tempt at  Glasgow,)  can  consolidate  the  constitu- 
tion, and  furnish  an  authoritative  commentary  on 
the  law  of  the  church,  and  the  law  of  the  land; — 
if  the  Holy  Scriptures  of  the  New  Testament, 
illustrated  by  the  example  of  Christians  for  up- 
wards of  seven  centuries; — if  the  standards  of  our 
church,  explained  and  corroborated  by  the  testi- 
mony of  our  venerable  martyrs,  be  solid  and  un- 
exceptionable documents, — then  the  Presbytery 
need  not  shrink  from  the  impartial  tribunal  of  a 
candid  public.  If  what  is  agreeable  to,  and 
founded  on  the  word  of  God,  shall  regulate  the 
worship  of  Christians — if  historical  fact,  and 
statute  law — and  constitutional  principle — and 
immemorial  usage — all  sanctioned  by  an  enlight- 
ened conviction,  shall  determine  this  question, 
then  the  reverend  Presbyter}'  may  go  with  con- 
fidence, and  demand  a  verdict  in  their  favour. 

With  respect  to  those  sacrifices  which  our  bro- 
ther hath  pledged  himself  to  make  for  the  loyal, 
enlightened,  and  respectable  congregation  of  St. 
Andrew's,  your  committee  do  not  wish  to  restrain 
our  brother  in  the  smallest  degree.  If  a  sincere 
desire  to  benefit  that  congregation,  which  hath 
discovered  such  an  uncommon  attachment  to  his 
ministry,  hath  prompted  him  to  speak  in  such 
glowing  language,  your  committee  most  >incerely 
pray,  that  wherever  Providence  may  order  the  lot 
of  our  brother,  he  may  always  experience  a  simi- 
lar attachment  from  his  congregation.  If,  on  the 
other  hand,  this  pledge  v*  Or  hi^  readiness  to  make 
sacrifices,"  was  thrown  out,  merely  to  announce 
to  the  Presbytery,  and  to  the  world,  his  fixed  and 
resolute  determination  to  use  every  lawful  tec 


171 

thod  to  carry  his  favourite  measure,  your  com- 
mittee are  equally  ready  and  equally  determined 
to  use  every  legal  and  constitutional  method  to 
oppose  him,  and  they  have  no  doubt  of  the  re- 
sult. 

In  fine,  our  brother  has  repeatedly  admitted, 
that  in  Scotland  there  is  a  prejudice  against  Or- 
gans, which,  he  says,  has  grown  into  antipathy. 
It  was  no  doubt  bold  and  manly  in  him,  to  under- 
take, single-handed,  to  cure  that  prejudice,  and  to 
remove  that  antipathy.  And  though  we  do  not 
wish  to  infringe  what  he  styles  his  sacred,  pri- 
vate, hereditary  rights,  there  were  many  objects 
of  no  small  importance,  to  which  he  ought  to 
have  paid  some  attention,  before  he  engaged  in 
this  difficult  enterprize.  For  though  we  have  not 
indulged  in  the  mistake,  which  he  says  we  have, 
of  maintaining  that  the  minister  and  congregation 
of  St.  Andrew's  were  assuming  to  themselves  the 
sole  prerogative  ot  enacting  a  law  for  the  whole 
church;  yet  we  certainly  have  affirmed,  that  in 
his  bold  attempt  to  remove  that  prejudice,  he  had 
no  title,  either  directly  or  indirectly,  to  undertake 
such  a  business,  without  consulting  his  ecclesiasr 
tical  superiors.  And  we,  likewise,  most  certainly 
say,  that  however  peaceable  his  designs  might  be, 
they  have  been  conducted  in  such  a  manner,  as 
to  have  a  tendency  to  produce  disputes  with  his 
Presbytery,  with  the  magistrates  and  town  coun- 
cil of  Glasgow,  with  the  people  of  Glasgow,  and 
with  the  people  of  Scotland.  But  we  will  not 
allow,  that  since  the  Reformation,  our  country- 
men have  laboured  under  prejudice.  We  will 
contrast  with  the  sentiments  of  the  minister  of  St. 
Andrew's,  the  sentiments  of  the  late  Principal 
Duulop,  of  the  University  of  Glasgow. 


172 

This  venerable  man,  whose  singular  pietj  . 
prudence,  public  spirit,  universal  km  .  and 

general  usefulness,  are  celebrated  in  Wodro 
History,  acted  a  conspicuous  part  in  the  affairs  of 
our  church,  from  the  Revolution  downward,  for 
many  years.  He  had  suffered  for  his  attachment 
to  the  pure  principles  of  Presbytery ;  he  under- 
stood them  well,  and  thus  i  If  on 
the  point  at  issue. 

"  We  celebrate  the  goodness  of  God,  which 
*4  carried  our  Reformation  to  such  a  high  pitch 
"  of  perfection,  with  re>pect  to  our  government 
%<  and  worship,  and  delivered  them  from  all  that 
;t  vain  pomp,  which  darkened  the  glory  of  the 
"  Gospel  service,  and  the  whole  of  the  supersti- 
"  tious  or  insignificant  inventions  of  an  imaginary 
"  decency  and  order,  which  sullied  the  divine 
"  beauty  and  lustre  of  that  noble  simplicity  which 
"  distinguished  the  devotions  of  the  apostolical 
"  times;  and  our  church  glories  in  the  primitive 
"  plainness  of  her  worship,  more  than  in  all  the 
14  foreign  ornaments  borrowed  from  this  world, 
••  though  these  appear  indeed  incomparably  more 
;;  charming  to  earthly  minds. 

11  We  are  sensible  that  it  is  a  necessary  conse- 
u  quence  of  the  nature  of  our  Reformation  in 
"  these  particulars,  that  there  is  nothing  left  in 
"  our  worship  which  is  proper  to  captivate  the 
"  senses  of  mankind,  or  amuse  their  imagina- 
"  tions;  we  have  no  magnificence  and  splendour 
"  of  devotion  to  dazzle  the  eye,  nor  harmony  of 
"  instrumental  mlisic  to  enliven  our  worship  and 
"  sooth  the  ears  of  the  assembly.  Pomp,  and 
11  show,  and  ceremony,  are  entirely  strangers  in 
"  our  churches,  and  we  have  little  in  common. 
"  with  that  apostate  church,  whose  yoke  we  threw 


173 

"  off  at  the  Reformation,  or  with  the  exterioi 
"  greatness  and  magnificence  of  the  Jewish  tem- 
"  pie  and  its  service. 

"  For  which  reason,  we  know  we  must  lay  our 
"  account  to  be  despised  by  the  men  of  the  world. 
"  who  value  nothing  that  is  stripped  of  the  al- 
Cl  lurements  of  sense,  and  fancy  that  a  rich  and 
11  gaudy  dress  contributes  to  the  majesty,  and 
"  raises  the  excellency  of  religious  service;  who 
"  seek  for  the  same  dazzling  pomp  and  splendid 
;;  appearances  to  recommend  their  worship,  which 
H  they  are  so  fond  of  in  their  equipage  and  ta- 
"  bles;  and  think  that  a  veneration  and  respect 
"  to  the  service  of  the  church,  is  to  be  raised  by 
"  the  same  methods  that  procure  an  esteem  and 
"  fondness  for  a  court.  We  have  nothing  to 
"  tempt  persons  of  such  inclinations;  we  know 
"  they  will  entertain  the  meannest  thoughts,  and 
"  most  disdainful  notions  of  a  worship  too  plain 
"  and  homely  for  them,  and  fit  only  for  the  rude 
"  and  unmannerly  multitude,  who  have  not  a 
"  taste  delicate  enough  for  what  is  truly  great 
u  and  noble. 

"  But  how  much  soever,  upon  this  account,  we 
M  may  be  despised  by  the  great  and  learned,  the 
"  Church  of  Scotland,  we  hope,  will  always  pub- 
"  licly  own  the  simplicity  and  plainness  of  her 
"  worship,  as  her  peculiar  glory,  and  believe  that 
"  these,  to  a  spiritual  eye,  are  beautified  with  a 
"  lustre  which  external  objects  are  incapable  of, 
"  and  of  too  elevated  a  nature  for  the  senses  to 
u  look  at.  She  is  not  ashamed  to  acknowledge 
"  her  sentiments,  that  the  devotions  of  Christians 
"  stand  in  no  need  of  the  outward  helps  afforded 
M  to  the  Jews,  and  that  the  triumphs  of  all- 
15* 


174 

11  conquering"  love,  the  mighty  acts  of  a  Re- 
11  deenier,  all  the  powers  and  glories  of  an  im- 
11  mortal  life,  which  are  represented  to  our  wonder 
11  and  meditation  under  the  Gospel,  are  far  nobler 
"  springs  of  devotion,  and  fitter  to  animate  with 
"  a  cheerful  zeal,  and  inspire  the  most  fervent 
"  affections,  than  the  meanner  helps  afforded  un- 
"  der  the  law — the  costliness  of  pontifical  gar- 
"  meats,  the  glory  of  a  magnificent  temple,  the 
u  ceremony  of  worship  and  power  of  music. 

"  Our  church  believes  it  to  be  one  design  of 
;'  the  better  reformation  of  things,  to  raise  the 
"  Christian  worshippers  above  the  airy  grandeur 
"  of  sense,  and  instead  of  a  laborious  service,  to 
"  introduce  a  worship  worthy  of  the  Father  of 
*;  spirits,  that  should  be  truly  great  and  manly; 
*'  the  beauty  and  the  power  whereof,  should  he 
"  spirit  and  life,  and  which,  instead  of  a  servile 
"  imitation  of  the  temple,  should  be  all  purified  rea- 
"  son  and  religion,  and  make  the  nearest  ap- 
"  proaches  to  the  devotion  of  the  heavenly  state, 
M  where  there  is  no  temple.  And  how  despicable 
u  soever  this  may  appear  to  earthly  minds,  and 
•:  distasteful  to  the  senses,  that  are  pleased  with 
••  show  and  appearance,  we  are  not  afraid  to 
u  own,  that  we  believe  that  an  imitation  of  our 
"  blessed  Redeemer  and  his  apostles,  in  the  plain- 
"  ness  and  spirituality  of  their  devotions,  and  an 
"  endeavour  to  copy  after  the  example  of  these 
"  truly  primitive  times,  will  ever  bear  US  up  to 
n  all  the  just  decency  and  order  of  the  Go-pel 
••  church;  and  that  in  conformity  hereto,  the 
"  naked  simplicity  of  our  worship  is  beautified 
••  with  a  superior  lustre,  and  shines  with  a  bright- 
-•  ness  more  worthy  of  iT.  than  When  dressed  iq 


175 

u  the  gayest  colours,  and  busked  up  with  the 
"  richest  and  most  artful  ornaments  of  human 
"  fancy  and  contrivance." 

(Signed)  William  Porteous. 

Robert  Balfour. 

James  Laps  lie. 

James  M'Leax. 


Minute  of  Presbytery. 

4th  May,  1S08. 

The  Presbytery  being  met,  and  constituted — 
It  was  moved,  and  seconded,  that  the  thanks  of 
this  Presbytery  should  be  given  to  their  com- 
mittee for  their  great  diligence  in  preparing  the 
able  answer  to  Dr.  Ritchie's  Statement,  mentioned 
in  last  minute,  which  motion  the  Presbytery 
agreed  to,  and  the  moderator,  in  their  name, 
gave  the  committee  thanks  accordingly;  it  being 
understood,  that  the  original  dissentients,  to- 
gether with  Dr.  Taylor,  jun.  Dr.  Lockhart,  and 
Dr.  Ritchie,  do  not  concur  in  said  vote  of 
thanks.* 

It  was  moved,  and  seconded,  that  the  Pres- 
bytery should  give  thanks  to  the  Lord  Provost, 
magistrates,  and  city  council  of  Glasgow,  for  the 
wisdom,  propriety,  and  discretion  of  their  con- 
duct, in  referring  the  congregation  of  St.  An- 
drew's church   to   their  ecclesiastical   superiors. 


*It  is  to  be  regretted,  that  the  original  dissentients,  together 
with  the  three  gentlemen,  who  were  indulged  v.  irli  liberty  to 
give  in  explanations,  should  have  thought  it  necessary,  in  this 
manner,  to  put  the  world  in  mind  that  they  had  ever  differed 
from  the  reverend  Presbytery. 


176 

The  Presbyter y,  without  a  vote,  agreed  to  thr 
above  motion;  and  appoint  the  Rev.  Mr.  Lapslir, 
(moderator,)  Dr.  Porteous,  Dr.  Balfour,  and  Mr. 
M'Lean,  as  a  committee  to  communicate  to  the 
Lord  Provost,  magistrates,  and  city  council  of 
Glasgow,  this  vote  of  thanks,  in  name  of  the 
Presbytery;  together  with  an  extract  of  the  Pres- 
bytery's minutes  of  7th  October  last,  on  this 
business. 

Mr.  Burns  called  the  attention  of  the  Pres- 
tery  to  two  printed  letters,  addressed  to  the  Lord 
Provost  of  the  city  of  Glasgow,  in  which,  among 
several  other  misrepresentations,  the  following 
passages  are  particularly  submitted  to  the  con- 
sideration of  the  Presbytery,  viz.  page  26,  in 
which  Dr.  B.  is  said  to  have  quoted  1  Cor.  xiii. 
11.  to  prove  "  that  Organs  were  condemned,  and 
"  that  they  were  among  the  number  of  childish 
11  things  which  the  apostle  put  away,  when  he 
"  became  a  man."  To  which  it  is  added,  that 
this  rather  surprised  the  letter  writer,  as  he  "  had 
"  been  taught  always  to  look  up  to  him  (Dr.  B.) 
11  as  a  sound  divine,  and  one  that  would  not 
"  handle  the  word  of  God  deceitfully.*' — Page 
40,  Mr.  M'L.  is  represented  to  have  said,  "  that 
"  those  churches  that  used  Organs  were  churches 
"  of  antichrist/'— Pages  48,  41),  Dr.  P.  and  Mr. 
L.  are  stated,  "  wantonly  to  have  charged  Dr. 
"  Ritchie  with  the  awful  crime  of  perjury,  in  the 
u  violation  of  his  ordination  \o\\-;*'  and  Dr.  P. 
is  said  to  have  u  declared  that  man  perjured, 
%<  who  would  deviate  one  iota  from  the  practice 
11  established  at  the  passing  of  the  foresaid  act-.*1 
— It  was  therefore  moved,  that  the  Presbytery 
should  declare  their  entire  persuasion,  thai  the 
expressions  referred  to.  in  pages  40,  48,  49,  were 


m 

not  used  by  any  member  of  this  court:  and  that 
with  respect  to  the  quotation,  page  26,  from 
1  Cor.  xiii.  11.  Dr.  Balfour  did  not  employ  the 
above  passage  as  an  argument  against  Organs, 
but  merely  as  Scripture  language,  in  the  way  of 
accommodation. 

The  Presbytery  having  considered  the  above 
motion,  are  of  opinion,  that  it  is  beneath  them, 
as  a  court,  to  take  notice  of  any  anonymous 
pamphlet;  but,  in  the  present  instance,  they  judge 
it  proper  hereby  to  declare,  in  terms  of  the  mo- 
tion, "  their  entire  persuasion  that  the  expres- 
"  ^ions  referred  to  in  the  40th,  4Sth  and  49th 
"  pages,  were  not  used  by  any  member  of  this 
•;  court;  and  that  with  respect  to  the  quotation, 
"  page  26,  from  1  Cor.  xiii.  11.  Dr.  Balfour  did 
M  not  employ  the  above  passage  as  an  argument 
"  against  Organs,  but  merely  as  Scripture  Ian- 
•;  guage,  by  way  of  accommodation," 


CONCLUSION. 


It  is  manifest  from  the  preceding  statement, 
that  the  Presbytery  of  Glasgow  and  Dr.  Ritchie 
have  respectively  made  a  solemn  appeal  to  pos- 
terity, in  support  of  their  several  opinions  relative 
to  the  use  of  instrumental  music  in  the  public 
worship  of  God  in  the  Church  of  Scotland.  The 
Presbytery  have  always  acted  upon  the  defensive, 
and  contented  themselves  with  repelling  the  ag- 
gressions of  their  opponents.  Self-defence,  the 
vindication  of  the  Lord  Provost,  magistrates  and 
council  of  the  city  of  Glasgow,  and  inviolable 
attachment  to  the  purity  of  our  religious  worship, 
have  induced  the  editors,  who  are  all  members  of 
the  Presbytery  of  Glasgow,  to  intrude  themselves 
in  this  manner,  upon  the  notice  of  their  coun- 
trymen. 

They  have  come  with  a  plain  unvarnished  tale. 
They  have  confirmed  it  with  unexceptionable  do- 
cuments. They  have  judged  it  fair  and  honour- 
able, that  their  cotemporaries,  as  well  as  posteri- 
ty, should  be  furnished  with  the  means  of  deciding 
on  the  merits  of  the  point  at  issue. 

The  candid  manner  in  which  Dr.  Lockhart 
expresses  himself,  would  have  inclined  us  to  pass 
over  his  explanation  without  any  stricture  what- 
ever. But  a  regard  for  the  honour  of  the  Presby- 
tery, requires  the  following  remarks.  Dr.  Lock- 
hart  says,  that  "  it  does  not  appear  to  him  that  it 
14  was  the  intention  of  the  dissentients  to  charge1 
"  the  Presbytery  with  any  violation  of  trutU  aiuj 


179 

il  justice — and  that  it  would  have  been  desirable 
"  that  the  Presbytery  had  declined  employing  the 
"  severe  language  to  which  they  have  resorted  in 
"  their  answer."  We  presume  not  to  pry  into 
the  motives  of  any  class  of  men;  but  this  we 
know,  that  the  manner  in  which  the  expressions, 
truth  and  justice,  were  used  by  the  dissentients, 
perfectly  authorized  the  Presbytery  to  give  that 
answer  which  is  upon  record,  lest  the  world  should 
have  conceived  that  the  declaration  which  the 
Presbytery  had  emitted,  was  contrary  to  truth 
and  justice. 

Dr.  Lockhart  regrets,  "  that  in  the  argument, 
"  as  conducted  by  the  Presbyteiy,  they  should 
"  have  given  any  detailed  statement  in  relation 
"  to  the  particular  case,  which  led  to  the  discus- 
"  sion."  How  could  the  Presbytery  conduct 
their  argument  without  referring  to  the  case 
which  had  given  rise  to  that  argument?  The 
Presbytery  is  found  fault  with  by  Dr.  Lockhart, 
for  giving  a  detailed  statement  of  the  particu- 
lar case;  and  they  are  condemned  by  the  dis- 
sentients, for  not  confining  themselves  entirely 
unto  it. 

When  Dr.  Lockhart,  in  his  last  observation, 
declares,  that  he  is  "  unwilling  to  acquiesce  in 
"  any  such  application  of  the  second  command- 
u  ment  as  would  charge  with  false  worship,  our 
"  Christian  brethren  of  other  churches;"  it  ought 
to  be  observed,  that  the  Presbytery  did  not  apply 
the  second  commandment  in  the  manner  here 
supposed.  It  is  the  authoritative  commentary  of 
this  church  upon  the  second  commandment,  from 
which  the  Presbytery  reason,  and  which  they 
maintain,  is  binding  upon  all  her  ministers  and 
people. 


180 

Similar  candour,  we  have  no  doubt,  pervades 

the  explanation  given  in  by  Dr.  Taylor,  Jim. 
It  contains,  however,  a  critique  upon  the  W 
bytery,  and  some  irrelevant  matter,  which  might 
well  have  been  spared.  "  I  was  out  of  the  coun- 
"  try,"  says  he,  "  when  this  business  commenced; 
"  I  was  astonished  beyond  measure  when  I  heard 
"  of  it,  by  accident,  400  miles  hence;  and  when 
"  a  final  sentence  was  given,  I  had  the  honour  of 
"  presiding  in  the  court.  And  thus,  from  the 
"  commencement  to  the  close,  had  no  opportu- 
"  nity  of  taking  part,  either  on  one  side  or  the 
"  other,  in  this  singular  business."*  All  this  seems 
to  be  simple  narrative,  and  yet  contains  such  a 
view  of  the  matter  as  cannot  be  passed  over  with- 
out animadversion.  As  Dr.  Taylor  had  pre- 
served his  neutrality  till  the  close  of  this  business, 
and  had  even  presided  in  the  court,  at  that  pe- 
riod, was  this  a  good  reason  for  his  taking  a  side 
when  a  final  sentence  was  given?  Does  not  every 
one  know,  that  the  moderator  of  a  Presbytery 
may  have  an  opportunity,  if  he  choose  to  ask  it, 
of  taking  part  in  any  business  before  that  court? 
— and  that  he  should  be  the  last  member  of 
court  to  impugn  a  sentence  passed  under  his  own 
auspices  ? 

The  editors  beg  it  to  be  understood  that  th< 
remarks,   and  others  which  follow,  contain  not  a 
single  particle  ^i'  disrespect  towards  \)\.  Taylor, 
whom  they  highly  regard.     But  as  he  has  chosen 

to  become  the  <>r,    it    i>    perfectly    fair   to 

show   that  he  has  done  so  akroneously,  and  to 

repel  hi-  ion. 

A    to  the  "  license  taken/'  and  "  the  heat  and 

•  ride  page  !•». 


181 

♦*  passion"  betrayed  by  the  Presbytery,  in  the 
paper  alluded  to,  the  public  will  judge,  without 
our  commentary.  But  the  specimen  which  Dr. 
Taylor  gives  "  of  language  of  this  heated  and 
"  exaggerated  kind,"  is  certainly  curious.  "  The 
"  manner,"  says  he,  "  in  which  the  congregation 
"  of  St.  Andrew's  is  mentioned  in  this  paper,  is 
"  surely  in  too  lofty  a  style. — c  Some  persons  de- 
"  scribing  themselves  as  the  congregation  of  St. 
u  Andrew's  church,' — this  is  the  expression."* 
Now,  with  all  due  deference,  it  is  contended,  that 
Dr.  Taylor  must  have  been  hard  run  indeed  for 
a  specimen  of  the  lofty  style — of  heated  and  exag- 
gerated language,  when  he  was  forced  to  select  this 
one.  No  expression  in  the  whole  paper  is  more 
calm,  dispassionate,  and  coldly  correct.  It  has 
not  the  most  distant  "  tendency  to  convey  the  idea 
"  that  there  were  pretensions  on  the  part  of  those 
"  spoken  of,  which  were  not  well  founded."  It 
is  nothing  more  than  the  trite,  formal  expression, 
which  has  long  been  sanctioned  and  recognized 
by  practice,  and  might,  with  as  much  propriety, 
have  been  selected  as  a  specimen  of  the  sublime 
and  beautiful,  as  of  the  heated,  exaggerated,  or 
lofty  style. 

Dr.  Taylor  does  not  seem  to  be  more  happy  in 
his  criticism  on  the  epithet  "  insidious,"  as  applied 
by  the  Presbytery  to  the  term  "  unauthorised."* 
For  if  the  term  "  unauthorised,"  be  of  that  ambi- 
guous, equivocal  kind,  which  naturally  suggest- 
ed the  hypothetical  case  put  by  the  Presbytery, 
then,  neither  candour  nor  politeness  forbids  the 
use  of  such  a  plain,  though  unpleasant  term. 

The  charge  of  anachronism  has  already  been 
sufficiently  exposed.f     It  is  only  necessary  here 

*  Vide  p.  48.  t  Vide  Note,  p.  49. 

16 


182 

to  observe,  that  as  Dr.  Taylor  has  been  so  pro- 
digal of  his  politeness  to  the  opponents  of  the 
Presbytery,  it  might  have  been  expected  that  he 
would  have  bestowed  a  mite  of  it  on  the  Presby- 
tery and  their  committee.  "  A  gross  anachro- 
nism," is  certainly  a  heavy  charge,  and  not  ex- 
pressed in  very  gentle  terms,  especially  when  it 
happens  to  be  utterly  unfounded.*  Nor  can  we 
admire  the  elegance  of  Dr.  Taylor's  compliment 


We  can  easily  conceive  how  Dr.  Taylor  has  fallen  into  the 
mistake  on  which  this  charge  of  anachronism  is  founded.  He 
has  not  sufficiently  attended  to  the  distinction  in  point  of  time, 
between  the  invention  of  Organs,  of  which  the  East  has  the 
honour,  and  their  introduction  into  the  West,  by  the  Greek  em- 
peror Constantinus  Copronymus,  who  sent  one  as  a  present  to 
Pepin,  king  of  France,  about  the  year  766.  How  long  Organs 
had  been  known  in  the  East,  prior  to  this  event,  it  is  impossible 
to  determine.  But  it  is  certain  that  they  cannot  be  less  ancient 
than  the  Council  of  Nice,  as  appears  from  the  emperor  Julian? 
•  pigram  upon  this  instrument  in  the  Anthologia. 

"  Quam  cerno  alterius  naturae  est  fistula,  nempe 

u  Altera  producit  fortasse  ha?c  aenea  tellus ; 

"  Horrendum  stridet,  nee  nostris  illamovetur 

M  Flatibus,  et  missus  taurino  e  carcere  ventus 

"  Subtus  agit  leves  calamos,  pcrque  ima  vagatur ; 

'•  Mox  aliquis  velox  digitis  insignis  et  arte 

u  Adstat,  Concordes  calamis  pulsatque  tabellas, 

"  Ast  ilia;  subito  exsiliunt,  et  Carmina  miscent." 

*'  I  see  reeds  of  a  new  species,  the  growth  of  another  and  a 
•  brazen  soil,   such  as  are  not  agitated  by  our  winds,  but  by  a 

blast  that  rushes  from  a  leathern  cavern  beneath  their  roots; 
■  while  a  robust  mortal,    running  wkh  swift  fingers  over  the 

Oft-Mordant  keys,  makes  them,  as  they  smoothly  dance,  emit 
;  melodious  sounds." 

Long,  however,  as  Organs  have  been  known  in  the  East,  they 
have  never,  a^  far  ;is  w»-  know,  been  used  in  religious  worship 
by  the  Greek  or  Armenian  churches.  Zonaras  tells  us  of  an 
Organ  set  up  all  of  pure  gold.  He  adds,  however,  not  that  this 
W99  to  pod  the  church  in  tune,  but  to  cast  a  glory  upon  the 
court,  and  to  draw  the  admiration  of  foreigners  upon  the  em- 
peror.  Zonar.  Tom.  S,  Anna!  in  Michaele  Impef.  In  the  Greek 
liturgies,  much  is  said  of  music,  but  an  Organ  is  not  so  much  ac 
mentioned  in  all  their  book- 


183 

to  the  committee  of  Presbytery,  for  their  kk  con- 
siderable labour."  It  would,  perhaps,  have  been 
as  consistent  with  the  rules  of  politeness,  had  Dr. 
Taylor  withheld  his  compliment,  as  well  as  hi* 
concurrence,  in  the  Presbytery's  vote  of  thanks  to 
their  committee. 

We  flatter  ourselves,  that  the  judicious  reader 
will  find,  that  the  Presbytery  have  shown,  not  only 
that  "  the  Presbyterian  church  must  differ  from 
"  Episcopacy — that  it  is  averse  to  the  hierarchy 
"  of  bishops — to  liturgy  and  read  prayers — and 
"  that  it  hath  a  discipline  of  its  own ;" — but 
also  that  both  our  church  and  state  have  gone 
"  farther  than  all  this,  and  accurately  defined  the 
"  particulars  of  worship  :" — And  that  if  the  Di- 
rectory, the  Confession  of  Faith,  and  the  Act  of 
Security  have  any  meaning,  the  singing  of  Psalms 
with  the  human  voice  alone,  must  be  regarded  as 
one  of  these  particulars.  This  is  exactly  what 
Dr.  Taylor  has  demanded. 

The  editors  have  no  desire  to  expose  the  secret 
history  of  this  controversy.  Dr.  Ritchie  has  cer- 
tainly communicated  sufficient  information  in  his 
Statement  to  enable  the  candid  public  to  deter- 
mine, whether  the  stirring  of  it  ought  not,  from 
first  to  last,  to  be  imputed  to  himself  and  his 
friends. 

A  scheme  is  apparently  formed  to  alter  the  ex- 
ternal mode  of  worship  recognized  by  the  consti- 
tution, and  sanctioned  and  defined  by  the  imme- 
morial, universal  practice  of  our  national  church. 
It  seems  to  be  systematically  carried  on,  even 
after  the  Lord  Provost,  magistrates  and  council 
of  the  city  of  Glasgow  had  refused  their  concur- 
rence, and  declared  that  the  ecclesiastical  authori- 
ties must  previously  be  consulted.  An  Organ, 
notwithstanding,  was  employed  in  St.  Andrew's 


184 

<  hurch,  at  a  weekly  rehearsal  of  sacred  music. 
By  and  by,  this  rehearsal  was  blended  with  reli- 
gious worship ;  and  when  every  thing  was  ready 
for  this  grand  musical  performance,  it  was  brought 
np  in  the  public  worship  of  God,  on  the  23d  of 
August  last.  These  seem  to  be  facts  attested  by 
the  minister  of  St.  Andrew's  church  himself. 

Without  dwelling  upon  the  deputations  to 
Edinburgh, — the  canvassings,  consultations,  and 
convivialities  at  Glasgow,  for  the  furtherance  of 
this  singular  business,  the  editors  appeal  to  the 
impartial  public,  whether  they  can  here  discern  a 
vestige  of  deference  or  respect  to  authority,  civil 
or  ecclesiastical  ?  Whether  they  can  here  disco- 
ver any  indications  of  the  confidence  of  private 
friendship,  or  concern  for  the  public  peace  ? 

With  this  remark  the  editors  would  have  been 
happy  to  have  taken  their  leave  of  this  singular 
business.  But  the  two  anonymous  letters  ad- 
dressed to  the  Lord  Provost  of  Glasgow,  on  the 
subject  of  the  Organ,  render  some  animadversions 
upon  them  indispensable.  Common  fame  has 
ascribed  these  letters  to  a  minister  of  the  Gospel. 
The  printer,  we  are  told,  has  declared,  that  he  is 
not  at  liberty  to  give  the  name  of  his  employer ; 
but  that  he  could  not  suppose  a  clergyman  of  the 
Church  of  Scotland  would  write  any  thing  which 
could  render  him  liable  to  damages.  Some  copies, 
we  are  informed,  have  been  sent  as  presents  to 
the  particular  friends  of  the  author.  One  of  these 
copies  we  have  seen,  with  an  inscription,  which 
is  presumed  to  be  in  his  hand  writing.  Be  all 
this  a>  it  may,  the  sentiments  and  language  of  Dr. 
Ritchie,  in  his  Statement,   seem,  in  many  instan- 

.  to  be  borrowed  by  \\\'\>  pamphleteer;  and  the 
plagiarism  is  but  ill  concealed,  by  all  the  trans- 
position of  words,  and  the  inversion  of  sentiment, 


185 

to  which  he  has  had  recourse.  From  these  cir- 
cumstances, an  adventitious  importance  is  stamped 
upon  this  pamphlet,  which  it  never  could  have 
derived  from  its  intrinsic  merits. 

[Here  the  editors  proceed  to  comment  with  se- 
verity upon  the  language  and  puerilities  of  the 
author  of  these  letters,  as  well  as  upon  various 
circumstances  connected  with  their  publication; 
and  also  to  rebut  sundry  misstatements  of  histori- 
cal facts,  and  etymological  criticisms,  which  they 
treat  as  "  frivolous — a  mere  shadow  of  literature, 
calculated  to  mislead  the  unwary."  But  as  the 
pamphlet  referred  to  is  not  before  the  American 
public,  it  is  thought  proper  to  omit  these  parts  of 
the  discussion,  as  having  little  bearing  upon  the 
main  question  previously  decided;  and  to  take 
up  the  series  of  remarks  towards  the  close,  where 
the  editors  come  to  notice  the  u  theology"  of  the 
letter  writer. — Am.  Ed.] 

Alas!  his  theology  is  but  sparingly  dealt 

out,  "  it  seems  not  to  be  derived  from  Locke,  nor 
11  Lyttleton,  nor  Luther,  nor  Calvin,"  and  what 
is  worst  of  all,  it  seems  not  to  be  derived  from  the 
Holy  Bible. -We  shall  confine  our  observa- 
tions to  what  he  inculcates  relative  to  the  devo- 
tions of  Christians  upon  earth,  and  to  the  view  he 
exhibits  of  the  employment  and  bliss  of  saints  in 
heaven. 

Of  Christians  on  earth  he  thus  speaks,  pages 
36,  37.  "  Were  all  men  enlightened  by  education, 
"  and  governed  by  reason  and  religion  every 
"  hour,  then  indeed  it  might  not  be  necessary  to 
"  have  recourse  to  external  objects  for  raising 
"  devout  affections;  but  mankind  are  weak  and 
H  sluggish.  The  learned,  as  well  as  the  ignorant, 
11  need  something  to  rouse  the  apathy  of  their 
"  minds  to  religious  exercises;  and  hence  the  ne- 
16* 


186 

11  cessity  of  devising  external  rites  and  ceremo- 
"  nies,  in  order  that  the  soul  may  be  come  at, 
11  through  the  medium  of  the  senses." — "  The 
"  moral  effects  of  all  the  fine  arts,  are  to  humanize 
"  and  improve  man;  and  whatever  can  tend  to 
"  excite  virtuous  emotions,  or  deepen  religious 
"  impressions,  instead  of  being  rejected,  should, 
11  by  every  good  man,  be  warmly  adopted.  Were 
"  the  Organ,  with  the  arts  of  sculpture,  intro- 
"  duced  into  our  churches,  they  might  produce 
"  astonishing  effects  on  the  ignorant,  who  are  the 
11  multitude;  and  who,  in  general,  in  every  age 
"  and  country,  are  only  instructed  in  the  solemni- 
11  ties  of  religion  through  the  senses." — We  know 
not  whether  the  public  may  have  patience  to  read, 
but  we  have  not  patience  to  transcribe  any  more 
of  this  very  dangerous,  and  we  must  add,  popish 
delusion.  If  "  the  spirituality  of  the  Gospel  for- 
"  bid  not  this  vain  deceit,"  then  every  man  may, 
both  in  divinity  and  morality,  do  that  which  is 
tight  in  his  own  eyes.  The  Papist,  according  to 
this  mode  of  reasoning,  has  better  means  of  being 
instructed  in  the  solemnities  of  religion,  than  the 
Protestant,  for  he  enjoys  all  the  benefit  of  Organs, 
pictures,  images,  &c.  According  to  this  mode  of 
reasoning,  the  people  of  England  must  be  more 
intelligent  in  divinity,  and  purer  in  their  morals, 
lhan  the  inhabitants  of  Scotland,  for  "  the  dormant 
ki  feelings  of  their  souls  are  roused  with  irrisisti- 
M  ble  force,  by  the  grand  and  solemn  symphonies 
14  of  the  Organ."  According  to  this  letter  wri- 
ter's plan,  our  blessed  Lord's  command  to  his 
apostles,  to  teach  all  nations,  or  first  to  enlighten 
the  understandings  of  men,  would  be  superfluous. 
The  work  of  the  Spirit  of  God,  upon  the  soul  of 
man,  might  then  be  accomplished  by  human 
means,  or  resolved  into  "  the  moral  effects  of  the 


187 

c<  fine  arts." — Instead  of  stopping  short  at  instru- 
mental music,  we  instantly  wander  and  are  lost 
among  pictures,  and  statues,  and  endless  contriv- 
ances of  a  similar  superstitious  tendency.  Does 
the  letter  writer  mean,  that  Christians  should  ra- 
ther be  guided  in  their  devotions  by  the  rhapsody 
of  Bruyere,  than  by  the  writings  of  St.  Paul? 

In  his  commentary  on  the  beatific  vision  of 
John  in  the  Revelation,  the  letter  writer  seems  to 
indicate,  that  heaven  is  a  school  in  which  the  fine 
arts  are  cultivated,  and  furnish  no  inconsiderable 
portion  of  the  happiness  of  the  redeemed.  "  The 
redeemed,"  page  33,  says  he,  "  are  represented 
"  as  having  the  harps  of  God  in  their  hands, 
"  and  singing  the  song  of  Moses  and  the  Lamb. 
"  Is  it  lawful,  then,  in  the  immediate  presence  of 
"  Infinite  Purity  himself,  for  the  happy,  in  their 
"  hallelujahs,  to  use  harps? — Can  any  thing  used 
11  in  the  worship  of  heaven,  by  the  church  (fir 
"  umphant,  be  sinful  in  the  church  militant?" 
Can  this  indeed  be  the  view  that  St.  John  has 
given  us  of  the  redeemed,  and  their  celestial  em- 
ployment, in  the  book  of  Revelation?  How  diffe- 
rent from  the  doctrine  he  has  taught  in  his  1st 
Epist.  iii.  2.  "  Beloved,  now  are  we  the  sons  of 
God,  and  it  doth  not  yet  appear  what  we  shall  be; 
but  we  know,  that  when  he  shall  appear,  we  shall 
be  like  him;  for  we  shall  see  him  as  he  is."  Is 
this  the  view  which  St.  Paul  has  exhibited  of 
paradise,  after  he  had  been  caught  up  into  it? 
He  heard  sounds,  indeed,  and  was  ravished  with 
them;  but  they  were  articulate  sounds,  they  were 
addressed  to  the  understanding.  "  He  heard  un- 
speakable words,  which  it  is  not  lawful  for  a  man 
to  utter."  This  is  the  infallible  report  that  Paul 
has  brought  us  of  paradise,  after  having  been 
caught  up  into  it.  The  reader  will  judge  whether 


188 

the  paradise  of  the  apostles  has  been  justly  repre- 
sented by  this  anonymous  pamphleteer. 

It  is  perfectly  unnecessary  to  dwell  any  longer 
upon  this  pamphlet.  As  to  his  sneer  at  the  man- 
ner in  which  the  Presbytery  arranged  their  argu- 
ments, which  he  seasons  with  a  quotation  from 
D'Alembert — that  arrangement  was  adopted  by 
Dr.  Ritchie,  in  his  speech,  prior  to  a  single  word 
being  uttered  by  the  Presbytery  on  the  subject. 
When  he  insinuates,  that  the  Presbytery  hath  pro- 
nounced instrumental  music,  in  its  very  nature,  pro- 
fane and  sinful — the  answer  is,  that  the  Presbytery 
never  uttered  a  syllable,  reflecting  on,  or  condemn- 
ing the  use  of  it,  in  any  church  of  Christ,  but  in 
their  own.  When  he  asserts,  that  Organs  were  pre- 
served not  only  by  a  Melancthon  and  a  Zuinglius, 
but  by  Calvinists  themselves,  and  even  in  Calvin's 
own  church  at  Geneva,  the  assertion  is  false.* 

His  argument,  that  by  rejecting  instrumental 
music,  in  the  public  worship  of  God,  we  virtually 
abolish  the  Psalms  of  David,  is  confuted  by  our 
uniform  practice.  AVe  admire  them — we  retain 
them — we  sing  them  with  the  understanding,  and 
with  the  heart.  When  he  introduces  the  abstract, 
but  very  important  question,  whether  not  only 
the  ideas,  but  the  very  words  of  Scripture  were 
inspired,  he  ought  to  recollect  that  this  is  a  ques- 
tion of  too  much  magnitude  and  delicacy  tor  him 
to  determine. 


*  u  The  only  amusement,"  says  Dr.  Bumey,  '•  which  Calvin 
seems  ever  to  hare  allowed  his   followers,  was  fwdmody,  and 

that  of  the  in<»t  unmeaning  and  monotonous  kind  ;  without 
harmony.  \aii«t\  <>!  accent,  t\t!>m,an<l  most  of  the  Constituent 
j>;nt>  o!  men-  melody.       Not  a  musical  inttrUBM  nt   w;is   suffered 

re  than  a  hundred  3  ears  .dor 
the  Reformation;  and  all  music,  except  this  metrical  psalmody, 
was  proscribed,  wherever  the  doctrines  of  this  reformer  wet* 

vol.  3.  p.  4 


189 

Finally,  he  seems  not  a  little  to  countenance 

the  method  of  translating  and  interpreting  Scrip- 
ture, adopted  by  Socinians,  and  those  who  would 
be  wise  above  what  is  written;  arrogantly  con- 
demning the  translation  presently  in  use  in  our 
land,  sanctioned  by  the  king,  and  authorized  by 
the  church ;  vainly  pretending  to  give  more  accu- 
rately the  meaning  of  a  passage,  by  analyzing 
the  original  word  as  used  by  profane  authors, — 
a  mode  of  criticism  which  has  been  destructive  of 
the  interests  of  truth  and  virtue  wherever  it  has 
been  adopted.  The  venerable  professor  of  the- 
ology in  this  university,  hath  shown,  in  the  most 
convincing  manner,  that  Scripture  is  the  best  in- 
terpreter of  Scripture;  and  that  such  men  as  Dr. 
Geddes,  by  inveigling  the  unwary  into  critical  dis- 
quisitions about  the  meaning  of  the  original,  have 
been  acting  as  pioneers  of  error  and  infidelity. 

Among  such  a  crowd  of  blemishes  in  this  pam- 
phlet, very  few  beauties  indeed  appear. 

The  author  may  have  been  animated  with  ar- 
dent friendship  to  Dr.  Ritchie,  when,  in  the  spirit 
of  knight  errantry,  he  sallied  forth  as  the  chain- 
pion  of  the  Organ.     But  alas! 

Non  tali  auxilio  nee  defensoribus  istis, 
Temp  us  eget. 

Priam  was  as  fit  for  driving  the  Greeks  out  of 
Troy,  as  this  pamphleteer  is  for  vindicating  his 
friend,  or  for  defending  the  cause  he  has  es- 
poused. 

We  cannot  conclude,  without  taking  notice  of 
the  time  in  which  this  pamphlet  was  ushered  into 
the  world.  Upon  Saturday  the  9th  of  April  last, 
the  day  immediately  preceding  the  celebration  of 
the  Lord's  Supper  in  the  city  of  Glasgow — a  day 
devoted  to  serious  preparation  for  that  solemn 


190 

ordinance,  an  advertisment  appeared  in  the  Glas- 
gow courier,  announcing  this  publication  for 
Monday  following,  and  giving  the  title  page  of 
it  at  length.  The  Lord  Provost  of  Glasgow, 
when  coming  from  public  worship,  and  going 
home  to  the  devotions  of  the  family  and  closet, 
was  held  up  to  public  view,  as 

"  Playing  such  fantastic  tricks  before  high  Heaven, 
Ci  As  make  the  angels  wciji.'' 

Habitually  influenced  as  that  gentleman  is,  by 
just  views  of  religion,  it  is  scarcely  to  be  con- 
ceived, but  that  his  mind,  on  that  solemn  occasion, 
would  be  painfully  disturbed  by  so  rude  and  un- 
christian a  provocation.  The  curiosity  of  the  ci- 
tizens was  wound  up  to  the  highest  pitch.  Con- 
jectures about  the  author,  and  the  contents  of  ihese 
letters,  were  set  afloat;  party  spirit  was  roused, 
and  the  minds  of  intending  communicants  were 
withdrawn  from  self-examination,  from  Christian 
charity,  and  from  the  contemplation  of  the  grace 
of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  The  Lord's  dajr  was 
diverted  too  much  from  its  proper  purpose;  and 
a  communion  Sabbath  turned  into  a  day  of  sus- 
pense and  distraction,  about  these  letters  and  their 
author.  This  author,  if  indeed  a  clergyman  of 
the  Church  of  Scotland,  and  if  officially  employ- 
ed to  assist  in  dispensing  the  sacrament  of  the 
Lord's  Supper  on  this  occasion,  presiding  at  the 
Lord's  table! — (trembling  cometh  upon  as;  the 
Psalmist  shall  finish  the  description) — He  hath 
put  forth  his  hand  against  "  such  as  were  at  peace 
"  with  him:  he  hath  broken  his  covenant.  The 
11  words  of  his  mouth  were  smoother  than  butter, 
"  but  war  wa>  in  his  heart:  his  Words  were  softer 
"  than  oil,  yet  were  the\  drawn  swords/** 

•  Piafati  te  20,  21 


191 

The  editors  beg  it  to  be  remembered,  that  they 
apply  this  description  to  no  individual.  They 
are  willing  to  believe  that  no  minister  of  the  Gos- 
pel could  act  so  culpable  and  unprincipled  a  part. 

Though  they  at  first  conceived  it  sufficient  to 
have  left  their  names  with  the  printer,  yet  upon 
more  mature  consideration,  they  judge  it  more 
respectful  to  the  public  to  subscribe  their  names. 

William  Porteous. 
John  Burns. 
James  Lapslie. 
Robert  Rennie. 
John  Pollock. 
James  M'Lean. 


in  the  note,  page  182,  where  the  Greek  and 
Armenian  churches  are  mentioned,  as  not  using 
instrumental  music,  we  ought  likewise  to  have 
added  the  Russian,  a  branch  of  the  Greek  church. 
For  though  the  emperor  be  considered  as  the 
head  of  that  church,  yet  no  music  is  allowed  in 
the  public  worship  of  God,  but  vocal  music. 


TO  IHL 


Reverend  Judicatories  of  the  Presbyterian 
Church,  in  the  United  States. 


With  that  respectful  regard  due  to  the 
ministering  pastors  of  that  church,  to  which 
the  author  of  the  following  remarks  was 
early  introduced  by  pious  parents ;  and  in  the 
prosperity  of  which,  as  a  Christian  church 
of  purest  form  and  principles,  he  may  justly 
continue  to  rejoice;  he  has  been  induced, 
thus  publicly,  to  submit  the  peculiar  circum- 
stances in  which  he  found  himself  and  fa- 
mily placed,  by  the  unauthorised  introduc- 
tion of  instrumental  music  into  public  wor- 
ship, in  that  house  of  God,  where  he  had 
been  for  many  years  a  regular  member. 

The  foundation  of  the  Presbyterian  church 
was  laid  upon  the  ground,  cleared  by  the  Re- 
formation from  the  rubbish  and  machinery 
of  an  artificial  and  corrupted  church ;  and  its 
simple  form  reared,  in  place  of  the  fantastic 
structures  of  superstition,  upon  the  delinea- 
tions and  practice  of  our  Saviour  and  his 
apostles.  It  was  approved,  and  partly  es- 
tablished bylaw,  in  the  countries  from  which 
our  population  has  been  principally  derived. 
And  indeed  the  attachment  to  it,  occasioned 
17 


194 

(lie  abandonment  of  all  their  interests  then, 
and  their  hazardous  settlement  here,  in  re- 
jection of  a  formal  and  pompous  worship, 
with  all  the  countenance  of  wealth  and 
power,  which  has  always  accompanied  and 
enforced  it.  Nor  was  a  fear  of  similar  impo- 
sition, by  force  or  fraud,  Wanting  among  the 
feelings  that  gave  birth  to  our  Revolution: 
And  the  conduct  of  a  particular  body  of 
clergy,  in  opposition  to  that  event,  suffi- 
ciently denoted  the  temper  prevailing  in  such 
churches. 

Soon  after  the  Revolutionary  war,  the 
Presbyterian  church  in  the  United  States 
issued  and  circulated,  through  all  its  Pres- 
byteries, certain  constitutional  standards  for 
doctrine,  government  and  discipline;  and 
for  a"  Directory  of Public  Worship;"  being, 
in  all  these  respects,  the  same  as  those  of 
the  Church  of  Scotland;  and  identified  with 
those  of  the  Westminster  Divines,  digested, 
ratified  and  sanctioned,  in  the  purest  days 
of  the  Reformation. 

This  Constitution,  after  seasonable1  pc- 
rusal,  and  due  consideration,  by  all  the  mi- 
nisters and  members  of  the  church,  a\;is  to 
he  adopted  or  rejected,  as  a  majority  of  the 
General  Assembly  might  direct,  agreeably 
io  the  instructions  received  for  that  purpose 
from  the  several  Presbyteries* 

It  was  accordingly  so  adopted  and  sanc- 
tioned by  act  of  the  f  ieneral  Assembly  :  and 


195 

i  v  preacher  of  the  Gospel,  since  liceni 
for  that  purpose;  even  member,  when  first 
admitted  to  solemn  ordinances ;  and  ever} 
pastor,  set  apart  and  ordained  to  a  charge, 
— have  been  solemnly  tested,  as  in  the  pre- 
sence of  God,  not  only  for  a  simple  appro- 
bation of  that  Constitution,  in  all  its  parts, 
but  also  for  their  unequivocal  acceptance  of 
it,  as  founded  on  the  word  of  God. 

In  what  respects,  or  to  what  extent,  inno- 
vations have  taken  place,  in  that  so  solemnly 
sanctioned  Constitution,  ye  who  stand  the 
appointed  watchmen  in  the  church  of  Christ, 
can  best  determine.  But  to  an  individual, 
who  feels  his  personal  obligations  as  a  mem- 
ber,— though  under  a  responsibility  far  less 
solemn  and  awful  than  ye  have  assumed 
who  minister  in  holy  things, — some  obvious 
innovations,  in  our  constitutional  standards, 
have  been,  and  still  are,  subjects  of  the 
deepest  regret. 

Nor  is  it  the  least  grievous  portion  of  this, 
that  though  such  inroads  have  become  pub- 
lic and  notorious,  no  judicial  steps,  known 
to  him  who  now  addresses  you,  have  yet 
been  taken  in  the  judicatories,  either  effectu- 
ally to  prevent,  or  explicitly  to  bear  testi- 
mony against,  some  of  the  most  glaring — 
especially  the  introduction  of  instrumental 
music. 

It  is  not  intended  here,  to  develope  the 
aberrations  that  may  have  occurred,  through 


196 

j  he  wide  boundaries  of  the  church  under  your 
care  and  vigilance.  Against  every  instance 
of  that  kind,  it  may  be  impossible  to  guard, 
by  the  utmost  jealousy  and  Watchfulm 
But,  beside  the  public  effect,  the  hardship 
to  which  an  individual  worshipper  has 
been  subjected,  in  that  corner  of  the  church 
where  his  lot  was  cast,  becomes  a  proper 
subject  of  serious  representation.  Espe- 
cially, when  several  others,  as  well  as  his 
own  family,  have  not  only  been  aggrieved 
in  the  same  respect,  but  even  totally  sepa- 
rated from  the  benefit  and  privileges  of  that 
church  to  which  they  were  attached,  and  in 
which  they  held  an  interest;  and  the  privi- 
leges of  which  they  had,  previously,  enjoyed 
from  their  infancy. 

It  will  be  a  proof  of  the  writer's  freedom 
from  any  censorious  disposition,  in  making 
the  present  address,  that  he  has  abstained 
from  all  public  reflections  on  these  matt< 
for  a  series  of  years — That,  while  he  felt 
an  irresistible  obligation  to  set  his  face 
against  a  measure,  indirectly  misrepresent- 
ing the  nature  of  that  God,  who  has  so  fully 
declared  in  his  word,  that  he  regards  nothing 
external,  but  looks  to  the  heart. — a  measure 
which  mingles  with  his  worship  that  which 
affectd  only  the  outward  senses,  and  for 
which  the  solemn  charge  addresses  itself  to 

•  Who  hath  required  this  at  your  hands 
— While    he  considered    it    an   addition  to 


197 

God's  worship  of  their  own  fancy,  and  for 
their  own  gratification,  who  introduced  it; 
while  it  imposed  a  yoke  not  laid  by  Him 
whose  authority  alone  is  acknowledged  by 
the  church ;  and  in  the  manner  of  the  proce- 
dure violating  the  fundamental  principles 
of  Presbyterian  church  government;  over- 
throwing together,  private  rights  with  public 
institutions — That  yet,  notwithstanding  all 
this,  avoiding  division  and  strife,  he  bore  the 
injustice;  and  having  expressed  his  sense  of 
it,  and  declared  his  apprehension  of  the  un- 
happy consequences,  in  a  letter*  to  the  com- 
mittee of  the  church ;  that  letter  remaining 
unanswered,  unnoticed  ;  and  the  writer  still 
unconvinced  of  his  error, — he  relinquished 
his  seat,  and  silently  withdrew  to  private 
worship,  or  to  its  public  performance,  in 
other  Christian  assemblies;  with  whom,  in- 
deed, he  could  cordially  join,  though  with 
much  inconvenience  and  derangement  to 
those  whom  he  was  bound  to  lead  and  keep 
together. 

If  it  still  be  asked,  why  no  reference  was 
made  to  the  judicatories  of  the  church,  in  a 
case  affecting  its  order  and  worship,  as  well 
as  the  rights  of  the  congregation  ?  It  may 
be  answered  farther,  that  this  particular  inno- 
vation appearing  to  be,  indirectly,  sanctioned 
by  the  acquiescence  of  our  Presbytery  and 

a  copy  of  that  letter  at  the  close  of  this  adfresi 

n* 


193 

Synod,  it  was  sufficient  to  admonish  an  indi- 
\idual,  that  his  complaints  might  be  vainly 
offered  on  the  subject.  Nor  could  relief  be 
attained,  but  by  such  processes  as  did  not 
comport  with  the  employments  of  the  writer 
to  pursue.  The  congregation  also,  having 
submitted  to  the  disposition  of  a  few  mem- 
bers, in  another  case,  whereby  their  own  or- 
der and  appointment  were  set  at  nought,  in 
establishing  a  pecuniary  allowance  to  the 
minister, — it  might  have  appeared  as  arro- 
gating too  much  to  himself,  for  any  one 
to  place  his  individual  objections  in  oppo- 
sition to  the  wishes  of  the  pastor,  and  the 
same  supporters,  with  the  apparent  approba- 
tion of  a  whole  Presbytery  and  Synod. 

It  may  not  be  amiss  to  mention,  that  pre- 
vious to  the  singular  introduction  of  an  Or- 
gan into  the  church  where  the  writer  and  his 
family  worshipped,  some  wandering  incli- 
nations appeared,  in  its  pastor,  to  the  adop- 
tion of  portions  of  the  liturgy  of  a  sister 
church;  and  the  M Gloria  Patrt"  &c.  was  in- 
troduced,— all  the  congregation  standing  up. 
However  piously  these  things  may  be  re- 
garded, by  those  long  in  their  practice;  or 
however  acquiesced  with  by  others,  as  in 
their  nature  indifferent :  yet,  when  taken  into 
v  ie\v.  as  connected  with  other  circumstances, 

involving  some  important  interests  of  the 

church,  they  could  not  he  considered  in  that 

light    bj    your  addresser:    though    his    dis- 


199 

approbation  was  manifested  only  by  non- 
compliance. A  superstitious  respect  to  a  par- 
ticular part  of  the  same  act  of  worship,  was 
enough  to  require  such  a  course,  from  any 
one  aware  of  its  common  effects ;  but  it  ap- 
peared also  a  servile  imitation  of  others,  and 
unsanctioned  by  that  "  Directory"  which 
the  pastor,  and  indeed  every  member  of  that 
church,  was  solemnly  pledged  to  maintain. 
The  love  of  novelty,  and  the  influence  of 
fancy,  are  ever  working  changes;  and  are 
not  restrained  by  the  sanctity  of  any  table  of 
duties,  though  inscribed  by  the  finger  of  God. 
Hence  those  additions  that  obscured,  or  over- 
whelmed, first  the  worship,  and  finally  the 
knowledge  of  the  Deity,  in  all  ages.  But 
the  nature  of  true  worship,  like  the  nature 
of  its  object,  changes  not. 

If  the  adding  to,  or  the  taking  away  from, 
the  code  of  divine  revelation,  be  laid  under 
the  most  awful  prohibition,  can  any  change 
in  the  immediate  act  of  address  to  its  Au- 
thor, be  of  light  consideration  ?  To  prevent 
this,  have  not  the  institutions  of  our  church 
been  established,  with  the  utmost  fear  and 
caution  ?  Is  all  this  care  to  come  to  nought, 
under  pretences  of  indifference,  or  even  of 
merit?  But,  that  you,  and  all,  should  be  on 
the  watch  against  these,  there  is  before  you 
the  fullest  exhibition,  in  the  past  history  of 
the  church,  that  things,  equally  as  small,  and 
by  some  as  much  commended,  brought  in 


200 

again  and  again,  have  actually  changed  and 
corrupted  all  religion  throughout  the  world; 
even  so  far  as  to  bring  down  the  visitation 
of  God,  to  cleanse  his  temple  from  things 
esteemed  indifferent,  or  sanctioned  by  men 
as  useful.  Yet  they,  who  oppose  the  intro- 
duction of  innovations,  are  stigmatized  by 
the  wise  and  zealous  introducers,  as  men  of 
narrow  and  bigoted  minds;  superstitious, 
and  rigidly  moulded  in  antique  casts, — with- 
out the  pleasing  refinement  that  abates  the 
spirit,  and  exalts  the  forms,  of  modern  de- 
votion! It  is  true,  that  "  wisdom  is  justified 
of  her  children ;" — such  presumptions  might 
be  scorned;  those  advancing  them  may  be 
pitied ;  but  no  man,  who  feels  that  his  res- 
ponsibility rests  where  the  changeful  dic- 
tations of  human  fancies  will  never  be  ad- 
mitted, can  easily  permit  himself  to  be  borne 
along  by  the  throng  of  innovators,  or  si- 
lenced when  conscience  bids  him  remon- 
strate against  them. 

Innovations,  in  such  a  spirit  of  triumphant 
self-complacency,  are  seldom  complimentary 
to  individuals,  or  to  their  impressions,  how- 
ever pure  or  pious.  Thus,  when  all  things 
were  prepared^  without  further  notice,  in- 
struments of  music  and  chorus-singing  were 
speedily  introduced,  without  either  congre- 
gational or  Presbyterial  sanction,  constitu- 
tional]) obtained.  So  that  those  who  were 
taken  by  surprise,  and  precluded  from  pri- 


201 

vileges  by  the  measure,  and  who  could  not 
bend  to  the  imposition  of  being  arbitrarily  be- 
reft of  their  privileges,  were  left  to  take  their 
course,  in  any  new  direction^  with  "  Provi- 
dence their  guide." 

That  an  instance  of  this  kind  should  in- 
duce others,  actuated  by  similar  views  and 
motives,  to  avail  themselves  of  the  prece- 
dent, was  to  be  expected.  Such  as  are  con- 
scious to  themselves  of  any  dereliction  of 
duty,  concur  as  readily  with  similar  innova- 
tors, as  these,  on  their  part,  do  with  such  an 
example.  Accordingly,  another  congrega- 
tion, in  the  bounds  of  the  same  Presbytery, 
soon  introduced  this  mechanical  Organ-ser- 
vice ;  not  only  without  obtaining  the  sanc- 
tion or  assent  of  the  Presbytery,  but  in  di- 
rect opposition  to  some  of  its  most  pious 
and  faithful  members;  and  that,  too,  in  de- 
fiance of  discord  and  separation. 

That  such  proceedings  should  have  oc- 
curred in  the  bosom  of  one  of  your  judica- 
tories, where  so  many  watchmen  are  placed 
to  guard  the  important  interests  of  the  church, 
and  the  constitutional  standards  they  are  so 
solemnly  pledged  to  maintain  in  all  their  pri- 
mitive purity, — to  one  individual,  at  least, 
appears  wholly  unaccountable. 

However  well  founded  these  impressions 
maybe,  and  however  much  to  be  regretted 
the  effects  which  such  proceedings  are  calcu- 
lated to  produce,  and  actually  have  produced, 


202 

it  is  nevertheless  admitted,  that  a  presump- 
tion might  be  indulged  by  some,  that  no 
violation  of  the  Constitution  had  taken 
place;  and  that  every  Presbyterian  congre- 
gation, under  your  jurisdiction,  was  at  li- 
berty to  new-model  its  own  public  worship, 
as  it  suited  their  own  particular  taste  and 
circumstances.  That  there  are  many  who 
consider  themselves  under  no  restrictions  in 
this  respect,  is  pretty  evident ;  and  it  is  not 
easy  to  conceive  how  it  should  be  otherwise, 
when  palpable  deviations  either  pass  unno- 
ticed, or  are  tacitly  acquiesced  with,  by 
those  whose  solemn  duty  it  is,  not  only  to 
pray  for,  but  to  watch  over  and  guard,  the 
purity  of  our  constitutional  principles. 

It  is  a  serious  consideration,  that  though 
there  be  probably  no  system  of  church  go- 
vernment more  congenial  than  our  own  w  ith 
the  principles  practised  on  by  our  Lord  and 
his  disciples,  or  that  affords  more  free  and 
ample  means  for  procuring  a  redress  of  any 
hardship,  under  which  an  individual  may  be 
brought,  in  the  due  exercise  of  his  religious 
privileges;  yet  such  is  the  predominance,  ac- 
quired and  acted  on  by  some  pastors,  in  la 
and  influential  congregations,  as  to  absorb 
every  idea  of  an  appeal  to  the  judicatories 
of  the  church;  and,  consequently,  their  will 
and  decision  become  often  as  arbitrary,  and 
as  well  supported  by  those  who  join  them, 
as  if  they  were  ;  diocesan?  bishops* 


203 

This,  to  some,  unacquainted  with  all  the 
circumstances  on  which  it  is  founded,  may 
appear  to  be  too  severe  an  animadversion. 
It  is  indeed  hoped  and  believed,  that  in- 
stances which  would  justify  it  are  rare  in 
our  churches.  But  this  neither  invalidates 
the  case  here  submitted,  nor  alleviates  the 
injustice  of  the  innovations,  to  which  the 
author  of  these  remarks,  as  well  as  others, 
was  subjected.  On  the  contrary,  the  more 
generally  the  great  body  of  the  church  en- 
joy its  purity  and  its  privileges,  guaranteed 
to  them  by  its  constitution,  the  more  griev- 
ous must  a  deprivation  be  felt  in  any  corner 
of  its  extended  pale. 

Whatever  reasons  formerly  recommended 
silence  on  this  interesting  subject,  the  pre- 
sent is  viewed  as  a  fit  occasion, — not  yet  out 
of  season, — for  the  observations  now  offered. 
The  correctness  of  former  impressions  might 
not  have  been  without  some  doubt.  But 
these  are  now  revived  and  strengthened  by 
an  accession  of  light  and  information;  which, 
it  is  to  be  regretted,  were  not  derived  from 
that  quarter  where  we  might  have  supposed 
a  still  greater  attachment  to  reformation  prin- 
ciples existed;  and  where,  on  other  subjects 
and  occasions,  steps  were  soon  taken  to 
guard  against  the  innovations  of  some  of 
those  transatlantic  churches,  whose  uncor- 
rupted  constitution  we  had  here  adopted. 

The  able  and  luminous  discussion  in  the 


204 

Presbytery   ol    Glasgow,   in   Scotland,   to 

which  this  is  annexed,  has  amply  justified 
the  impressions  before  entertained  on  the 
subject.    These  appear  to  be  now  sanctioned 

by  an  authority,  as  well  as  by  abilities  and 
arguments,  which,  it  may  be  presumed,  no 
friend  to  tin4  reformed  parity  01  Presbyterian 
worship,  can  feel  disposed  to  controvert. 
They  arc  not  particularly  adapted  to  the 
state  of  the  church  as  established  in  Scot- 
land; but  are  equally  so  to  all  who  have 
vowed  to  serve  God  in  consonance  with  the 
same  "  Directory"  for  public  worship,  in 
every  part  of  the  world. 

Laying  aside  all  consideration  of  what  is 
local  or  national  in  that  learned  and  libera] 
discussion,  the  introduction  of  instrumental 
music  into  any  Presbyterian  church,  or  in- 
deed into  any  Christian  church  founded  on 
the  principles  of  the  Reformation,  is,  above 
all  controversy,  proved  to  be  without  New 
Testament  authority;  and  is  therefore  in 
opposition  to  the  true  tenour  and  spirit  of 
the  Gospel  of  Christ;  as  well  as  to  his  ever* 
blessed  example  and  practice,  when  he  led 
his  disciples  away  from  the  splendour  of  the 
temple  service,  and  instructed  them.  that,  se- 
parated from  the  embellishments  of  worldlj 
pomp,  those  who  acceptably  worship  God, 
must  worship  him  kk  in  spirit  and  in  truth." 

It  is  rendered  equaU)  evident,  thai  Ofgan- 
service  is  in  opposition  to  the  Wk  Director) 


tor  Pul)lic  Worship ;"  and  consequently,  thai 
no  minister  in  connexion  with  the  Presby- 
terian church,  and  much  less  any  Presbytery 
or  Synod,  under  ordination  vows  to  support 
or  accord  therewith;  could,  innocently,  or 
constitutionally,  consent  to  its  introduction, 
in  public  worship. 

To  plead  that  the  "  Directory"  does  not, 
expressly,  prohibit  the  use  of  Organs ;  and 
that  their  introduction  is,  therefore,  no  vio- 
lation of  that  part  of  our  constitution ;  would 
be  only  a  wanton  trifling  with  sacred  things, 
with  vows  and  obligations.  Upon  such  rea- 
sons, it  is  not  easy  to  see  how  much  may  be 
introduced ;  or  w  hat,  that  is  absurd  and  er- 
roneous, can  be  excluded.  But  our  Cate- 
chisms, in  showing  what  is  forbidden  in  the 
Second  command  of  the  Decalogue,  ex- 
pressly assign  a  prohibition  of  all  "  will- 
worship,"  and  whatever  is  unsanctioned  by 
the  word  and  practice  of  Christ,  and  his 
apostles. 

There  is  still  an  argument,  that  will  have 
its  proper  weight  with  the  pious,  whose  af- 
fections towards  God  are  inseparably  accom- 
panied with  the  truest  sympathy  and  con- 
cern for  their  fellow  men.  Of  this  the 
learned  and  able  opponents  of  Organ-wor- 
ship, in  the  Presbytery  of  Glasgow,  seem 
not  to  have  availed  themselves ;  at  least  to 
its  full  extent.  Not  only  the  spirit  of  the 
Gospel,  but  that  worship  also  which  it  in- 
18 


206 

traduced  in  j)lace  of  the  temple-service,  W( 
uniformly,  characterized  by  our  Saviour's 
example  and  instructions,  as  equally  adapted 
to  all  men,  under  every  possible  circum- 
stance ;  but  in  a  more  especial  manner,  to 
the  poor  of  this  world.  A  mode  of  social 
worship,  adapted  to  the  pride  or  to  the  taste 
of  the  affluent,  and  wholly  unattainable  by 
the  poor,  has  no  foundation  or  sanction  in 
the  Gospel  of  the  Son  of  God :  and  when 
the  expense  of  Organs,  and  the  talents  ne- 
cessary for  any  harmonious  accompaniment 
of  the  service,  is  considered,  it  cannot  be  too 
much  to  assert,  that  such  a  mode  of  praising 
God  is  unattainable  by  most  of  the  churches 
in  this  or  other  countries.  Indeed,  most  of 
the  vocal  performers  are  silenced,  and  the 
poor  have  retired  to  other  churches,  or  to 
different  employments,  on  the  Sabbath.  For, 
shall  it  be  allowed  us  to  say,  "  That  the 
yoke  is  no  longer  easy,  nor  the  burden 
light?" 

Something  has  been  said  to  the  contrary 
of  all  this;  for  something  must  be  said — That 
many,  for  instance,  are  induced  to  attend  the 
church  by  the  charms  of  improved  music: 
and  that  some,  who  seem  to  decline  joining 
vocally  in  the  praises  of  God,  may  lay  aside 
their  reluctance,  from  Whatever  cause  it 
arises,  and  take  their  pari  in  unison  with  the 
instrument.  This  is  not  the  fact,  and  is 
contrary  to  the  nature  of  men;  who  indeed 


207 

catch  a  sympathetic  enthusiasm  from  each 
other,  but  in  private  or  public,  in  as  far  as 
divine  worship  is  concerned,  manifest  great 
coldness  to  instrumental  music, — as  every 
day's  observation  evinces.  A  few  amateurs 
may,  indeed,  be  induced  to  display  their 
vocal  powers  and  attainments;  or  join  the 
harmony  of  sounds  they  admire ;  but  it  can 
hardly  be  said  they  add  to  the  number  of 
worshippers,  though  they  may  to  the  audi- 
ence of  the  minister.  Indeed,  it  is  not  un- 
common to  find,  in  some  of  our  churches, 
men  of  no  approved  manners,  taking  the  lead 
in  this  way,  in  the  most  solemn  parts  of  our 
devotional  service ;  too  plainly  disclosing  an 
impious  taste  and  propensity  of  preferring 
musical  skill  in  the  worship  of  God,  to  piety 
of  principle,  to  the  worship  of  the  affections, 
and  the  devotion  of  the  soul. 

It  may  not  be  amiss  to  consider  the  length 
of  time  in  which  the  primitive  purity  of  the 
church  continued,  not  only  without  the  fa- 
vour of  the  world,  but  under  its  derision  and 
hatred.  It  never  conciliated  the  great  and 
fashionable,  the  tasty  and  refined,  by  ac- 
commodating itself  to  their  desires  and  fan- 
cies. It  subdued  them  by  the  simple  spirit 
of  goodness,  and  the  power  of  truth,  which 
scorned  all  artifice.  But,  when  Imperial 
pride  joined  its  vain  parade,  and  when  the 
world  courted,  it  forsook  its  Master  ;  lost  its 
original  brightness  and  simplicity;  sought 


208 

an  artificial  and  gaudy  splendour;  soothed 
and  swelled  itself  with  pompous,  but  empty 
souad  ;  increased  in  ceremonies  as  it  lessened 
in  piety ; — and,  instead  of  salvation,  brought 
subjection  and  slavery  upon  men.  That  in 
our  so  favoured  laud,  where  lordly  power 
has  lost  its  dominion,  its  tinsel  glitter,  affect- 
ed mien,  and  worthless  pretensions,  which 
appear  as  the  broken  image  of  Dagon,  in 
church  and  state,  before  our  nobler,  simpler 
institutes, — that  there  should  be  a  friendly 
feeling  towards  the  debasing  influence  of 
such  mixtures,  must  excite  shame  as  well  as 
regret.  But,  how  should  they  feel,  who  have 
participated  in  it,  in  the  very  face  of  solemn 
obligations  to  the  contrary  ? 

It  may  bo  said,  that  the  decision  of  a  fo- 
reign and  distant  Presbytery,  with  which 
we  have  no  connexion,  and  over  whom  we 
have  no  jurisdiction,  can  be  no  precedent  for 
us;  and,  therefore,  can  render  any  innova- 
tions of  ours,  neither  more  nor  less  valid. 
This  is  an  objection  only  to  authority,  and 
not  to  the  sanctions  of  reason  or  revelation. 
It  might  have  some  weight,  perhaps,  were 
that  foreign  Presbytery  not  a  portion  of  the 
same  church  of  Christ;  or  founded  on  other 
principles,  sanctioned  by  any  other  authority, 
or  regulated  l>\  any  different  standards  than 

those  which  we  also  have  solemnly  adopted. 

But  as  ill  all  these  we  are  perfectly  one  and 
the  same,  however  unconnected  and  sepa 


'     209 

Tated  in  other  respects,  such  an  objection, 
we  cannot  but  suppose,  neither  will,  nor 
ought  to  have  weight  with  intelligent  minds. 
It  certainly  cannot  be  said,  that  we  have  any 
greater  temptations  to  indulge  in  a  gaudy 
and  pompous  worship  than  those  to  which 
they  are  exposed.  As  little  do  our  manners 
and  habits,  or  the  example  of  neighbours, 
or  the  distinction  of  ranks, — so  coveted  by 
the  vain,  but  wisely  brushed  away  from  even 
our  civil  concerns, — afford  any  plea  or  pre- 
text for  such  disquieting  innovations. 

Indeed,  the  very  reverse  of  what  they  ex- 
perience in  these  respects,  is  our  happy  situ- 
ation. For  though  we  may  have  here  and 
there  a  few,  who  are  taken  with  the  mere- 
tricious invitations  of  external  show,  even  in 
sacred  things;  yet,  the  happy  simplicity  of 
our  best  principles,  whether  civil  or  religious, 
is,  in  many  essential  respects,  more  favour- 
able to  the  purity  of  our  "  Directory  for  Pub- 
lic Worship,"  than  that  which  they  possess: 
— and  it  might  be  added,  than  what  was  ex- 
perienced by  the  Fathers  of  the  Reforma- 
tion, or  enjoyed  even  by  the  apostles  and 
primitive  Christians  themselves.  To  be  in- 
sensible, therefore,  of  these  blessings  and 
privileges,  or  to  neglect  the  maintaining  of 
them,  so  far  as  to  admit,  or  tacitly  acquiesce 
with,  any  inroad  in  a  quarter  of  that  church 
with  which  we  stand  connected,  is  little  less 
than  apostacy ;  especially  in  the  most  hal- 
18* 


210 

lowed  and  vital  part  of  our  religion — the 
immediate  worship  of  the  ever-present  God ; 
before  whom  we  are  admonished  not  to  act 
inconsiderately,  but  "  to  be  more  ready  to 
hear  than  to  offer  the  sacrifice  of  folly." 

This,  it  may  be  said,  is  speaking  "  with 
all  boldness."  But  it  is  the  way  in  which 
we  are  commanded  to  speak  the  truth — and 
especially,  when  brought  to  the  test,  in  be- 
half of  religious  truth,  endangered  by  dege- 
neracy and  corruption. 

But,  if  it  be  grating  to  some,  let  them  re- 
member the  epithets  of  "  bigotry,  narrow- 
ness, and  prejudice,"  applied  to  those  they 
first  aggrieved,  and  then  aspersed. 

Liberality,  is  a  just  estimation  of  the  es- 
sentials or  circumstances  of  things,  and  their 
relative  influence,  according  to  the  im- 
portance of  the  objects — treating  the  little, 
lightly;  and  the  great,  with  grave  regard. 
It  indulges  weakness  and  infirmity;  but 
would  lose  its  name  and  nature  in  counte- 
nancing folly  or  error.  The  transcendent 
importance  of  religious  intercourse  with  the 
Lord  of  life,  "  the' Holy  One," — forbids  the 
light  admixture  of  fancy's  forms.  These 
must  stand  aloof,  as  the  solemn,  awful  busi- 
ness proceeds.  They  will  retire,  unable  to 
bear  its  weight)  seriousness.  But  shall  any 
claim  the  sanction  of  liberality,   while  they 

fly  to  the  "  paradise  of  fools,'*  because  "  to 
few  unknown." 


211 

In  whatever  light  these  strictures  may  be 
viewed,  either  by  those  to  whom  they  are 
addressed,  or  by  the  public  in  general,  it  is 
sufficient  for  the  author,  that  he  is  impelled 
by  a  conscious  sense  of  duty  in  giving  them 
publicity.  Far  from  indulging  an  accusatory 
spirit,  he  has  submitted,  for  years,  to  the 
grievance  of  which  he  complains.  And 
though  not  unknown  to  those  whose  duty 
it  was  to  remedy,  or  at  least  to  alleviate  the 
wrong;  he,  at  no  time,  experienced  this  sym- 
pathy, much  less  any  overture  for  convincing 
him  of  his  error,  in  a  Christian  way,  if  error 
it  was.  On  the  contrary,  he  seems  to  have 
been  deemed  one,  whose  scruples  might  be 
troublesome  to  the  changeful  and  assuming 
spirit  of  the  period — And,  though  unstriving, 
yet  preserving  a  countenance  of  disapproba- 
tion, too  unpleasant  and  foreboding  to  be 
retained  within  the  fold ;  and  better  cast  out 
than  preserved,  in  opposition  to  pastoral  or 
congregational  innovations,  however  uncon- 
stitutionally introduced. 

J.  M°. 

Baltimore ,  April,  1821. 


COPY  OF  A  LETTER 

To  the  Incorporated  Committee  of  the  Church,  <yc. 
alluded  to  in  the  preceding  Address,  and  to 
which  no   reply  ivas  received. 

Gentlemen,  Baltmoh*,  August,  1811. 

In  consequence  of  the  change  made  in  the  ser- 
vice of  the  church,  by  adding  instrumental  music 
to  the  worship  of  God,  I  am  constrained  to  per- 
form that  duty  in  the  association  of  other  Chris- 
tians; and  to  abandon  the  pew  which  I  have 
hitherto  held,  to  your  disposal. 

Thus  far,  I  suppose,  you  are  the  proper  body 
to  communicate  with.  But  to  whom  may  be  ad- 
dressed the  observations  which  I  feel  inclined  to 
offer,  on  the  nature  of  the  change,  and  the  man- 
ner in  which  it  has  been  compassed?  I  am  sen- 
sible, that  you  may  tell  me  it  did  not  proceed  from 
you,  nor  is  within  the  proper  sphere  of  your  du- 
ties; and,  as  duties  and  powers  are  correlative, 
that  the  committee  could  have  no  power  for  that 
which  was  no  duty.  But  as  there  is  no  one  who 
appears  to  be  principal,  where  many  are  partici- 
pators; and  where  every  one  also  may,  and  in  as 
far  as  I  know,  does  disclaim  the  responsibility  for 
an  act,  the  consequences  of  which  are  as  yet  un- 
seen; and  may  be  attended  with  an  accountability 
that  very  few,  who  contemplate  it,  may  be  wil- 
ling to  incur;  1  must  beg  leave  to  express  the 
thoughts  and  feelings,  produced  by  that  measure. 
to  the  body  I  am  now  writing  to,  and  who  cer- 
tainly possess  such  influence  in  administering  the 


213 

general  affairs  of  the  church,  that  an  innovation 
so  considerable,  could  hardly  be  supposed  to  have 
taken  place  without  their  concurrence.  If  offence 
be  given,  and  injury  done,  to  the  church  of  God, 
though  every  one  who  has  contributed  to  it  must 
bear  their  part  of  the  condemnation,  yet  they 
who  have  authority  and  power,  must  answer  dou- 
bly for  the  failure  or  transgression.  Upon  this 
acknowledged  principle  of  divine  precept,  and 
human  consciousness,  whatever  is  chargeable  to 
those  who  originated  the  measure,  your  body,  as 
well  as  the  pastor  and  elders  to  whom,  under  the 
congregation,  the  administration  of  the  spiritual 
and  temporal  affairs  of  the  church  are  committedy 
have  no  common  share  of  blame,  as  well  as  the 
peculiar  one  of  failure,  or  unfaithfulness,  in  offi- 
cial duty. 

It  cannot  be  expected  that  you  will  do  less  than 
justify  the  deed,  and  repel  the  imputation ;  which 
you  may,  perhaps,  in  the  common  way,  style  or 
denominate  the  offspring  of  narrowness  of  mind, 
and  illiberality.  But  though  I  would  neither 
violate  charity  by  presumptuous  censure,  nor  fail 
in  meekness  of  manners  while  venturing  to  re- 
prove; yet  it  becomes  necessary  to  remonstrate, 
with  plainness  and  decision,  011  a  case  affecting 
the  rights  of  the  congregation,  and  the  interests 
of  religion* — And,  I  may  add,  a  procedure  that 
flagrantly  violates  the  common  principles  of  so- 
ciety, as  well  as  the  peculiar  ones  of  the  Presby- 
terian church; — that  rejects  acknowledged  prin- 
ciples, unsettles  received  and  established  usages, 
and  abandons  open  and  legitimate  deliberation; 


*  This  alludes  to  the  innovation  bchi£  unsanctioned  by  the 
proper  authorities 


214 

and  substitutes  a  clandestine  mode  and  a  varying 
principle  of  conveniency — for  a  part,  to  elude 
the  combined  judgment  of  the  ivhole. 

Are  not  all  those,  who  have  objections  to  exter- 
nal, mechanical,  instrumental  machinery,  in  the 
service  of  God,  utterly  contemned,  overruled,  and 
borne  down  by  such  a  procedure  as  has  been 
adopted,  in  placing  an  Organ  in  the  church  ? 
Was  any  one  ignorant  that  it  would  offend  many  ? 
Was  this  offence  to  be  given,  and  their  rights  to 
be  suppressed,  as  of  no  consideration;  and  with 
the  most  contemptuous  determination  to  introduce 
what  was  the  purpose  of  a  part  of  the  congrega- 
tion, through  a  private  act  of  subscription,  with- 
out deigning  to  propose  it  for  the  consent  of  the 
whole,  to  receive  or  hear  objections,  or  allowing 
any  free  discussion  of  the  measurer  Has  it  not, 
hitherto,  been  universally  held  to  be  a  principle  of 
Presbyterian  church-association,  that  a  matter  of 
such  general  concern,  should  be  the  subject  of  the 
whole  congregation's  consideration,  judgment, 
and  order?  It  has  been  said  by  one,  whose  station 
in  the  church  ought  to  manifest  peculiar  caution 
and  tenderness,  "  that  it  would  not  have  been 
Presbyterial,  to  submit  the  matter  thus  to  the  con- 
gregation." Perhaps  it  is  the  first  time  this  has 
been  said  openly,  in  any  of  our  churches  in  Ame- 
rica; and  it  behoves,  therefore,  all  the  Presby- 
terian congregations  to  look  well  to  themselves, 
if  they  value  their  privileges.  If  an  election  of 
a  pastor,  elders,  and  a  committee,  can  divest  the 
people  of  all  power  and  right  to  judge  and  deter- 
mine on  the  regulation  of  the  service  of  the  church, 
they  are  under  the  most  slavish  subjection,  and 
are  left  only  with  the  privilege  of  choosing  their 
Iters.      But,  it  may  be  apprehended  that  the 


216 

Presbyterian  people  will  feel  the  refutation  of  such 
egregious  assertions,  in  themselves;  and  by  their 
powerful  sentence  put  down  the  heresy.  For 
what  is  there  in  the  character  or  office  of  any,  or 
of  all  of  those,  whereon  to  found  such  a  usurpa- 
tion ?  Neither  bishops,  ruling  elders,  committees, 
nor  trustees,  have  any  such  powers  attached  to 
their  offices,  characters,  or  trusts. 

The  truth  is,  that  the  consciousness  that  this 
favourite  object,  of  a  few,  could  hardly  endure 
the  trial  of  a  public  discussion,  dictated  the  surer 
mode  of  imposing  it  by  a  private  engagement; 
and  suggested  the  idea  of  justifying  a  hardy  as- 
sumption of  power,  leading  to  the  claim  and 
avowal  of  one  still  greater;  and  thus  showing 
more  clearly  than  ever,  the  necessity  for  our  con- 
stitutional standards  of  union,  and  the  principles 
which  they  inculcate  for  adhering  to  those  rules, 
provided  for  the  considering,  judging,  and  deter- 
mining on  every  important  matter  affecting  con- 
gregational interests,  in  the  assembly  of  the 
people. 

They  who  consider  themselves  aggrieved  in 
this  affair,  are  not  concerned  only  for  the  dis- 
placement they  surfer  in  the  church.  Injured,  as 
they  justly  feel  themselves,  in  their  rights;  and 
that  perhaps  chiefly  by  those  received  into  the 
society  as  of  yesterday;  obliged  to  abandon  the 
scats  made  almost  sacred  to  them  by  years  of  de- 
votional occupancj';  and  with  recollections,  also, 
retrospective  on  the  humbler  building  on  the  same 
^pot;  but  on  which  they  never  had  dreamed  that 
their  rights  would  have  been  invaded,  by  their 
contribution  to  more  comfortable  accommoda- 
tion;— how  is  it  possible  to  be  silent  under  such 
circumstances?     Not  only  the  violation  of  a  cha- 


2\6 

ritable  regard  to  themselves,  the  peace  and  union 
of  the  church,  but  the  interest  of  religion  itself,  ex- 
cite their  apprehensions;  and  compel  them  to  bear 
a  testimony  against  the  admission  of  unworthy  and 
frivolous  matters  into  the  adoration  of  that  infinite 
Spirit,  who  claims  the  heart  and  the  thoughts, 
and  rejects  every  operation  for  that  purpose, 
merely  external.  It  cannot,  indeed,  be  the  ex- 
travagant acknowledgment  of  any,  that  an  Or- 
gan is  introduced  as  ailbrding  any  pleasure  to  the 
Deity;  or,  that  empty  sounds  can  be  received  by 
him,  as  acceptable  worship.  But  they  must  have 
it  in  his  worship,  it  seems,  for  the  purpose  of  im- 
proving the  music.  But  in  what  consists  this  im- 
provement? and  by  whom  is  it  required?  "  Who 
has  required  this  at  our  hands?"  It  has  never 
been  demanded  or  prescribed  by  Him,  who  is 
"  the  way,  the  truth,  and  the  life,"  of  all  Gospel 
worship.  He  has,  at  no  time,  complained  of  bad 
music  in  our  truly  devout  service;  but  too  often 
has  had  reason  to  denounce  inattentive,  heartless 
worshippers.  There  would  seem,  then,  but  little 
reason  to  doubt,  that  they  who  are  so  fond  of 
music,  mean  to  please  themselves  more  than  to 
please  God.  Thus,  what  ought  in  truth  to  be 
considered  a  mere  luxurious  sensation,  they  would 
view  as  sufficiently  meritorious  to  have  a  place  in 
the  most  solemn  service  of  the  church! 

It  might  be  viewed  as  invidious,  to  inquire, 
how  far  this  reason  or  motive  appears  in  the  per- 
sons who  actually  join  in  the  service;  or  in  those 
who  are,  usually,  silent  hearers  only.  It  might 
be  equally  so  to  surmise,  that  the  musical  taste  of 
the  parlour  is  too  refined  and  exalted,  to  be  sub- 
jected to  the  humble  simplicity  of  the  church. 
However  this  be,  we  presume  that  it  is  to  the 


217 

truly  devout  worshippers  alone,  that  any  appeai 
should  be  made  for  the  aid  to  be  expected  from 
the  introduction  of  Organs  into  the  solemn  wor- 
ship of  the  Most  High. 

As  this  worship  requires  not  only  the  thoughts, 
but  also  the  affections,  being  kept  close  to  Him, 
while  they  utter  the  sounds  of  praise;  so  ought 
they  not  to  be  distracted  by  such  attention  as  is 
necessary  to  the  symphony  with  a  musical  instru- 
ment. Indeed  we  need  hardly  fear  contradiction 
in  asserting,  that  in  as  far  as  plain,  easy,  simple 
music  is  set  aside,  and  a  more  artificial  composi- 
tion employed,  so  far  is  true  spiritual  worship  dis- 
composed, troubled,  and  interrupted.  But  the 
common  music  in  our  churches  has  seldom,  per- 
haps never,  disquieted  the  worship  of  any  reli- 
gious man,  in  the  house  of  God.  There,  the  most 
refined  in  the  musical  art,  might  not  satisfy  those 
who  feel  no  devotion  of  the  heart.  It  is  a  solemn 
and  serious  duty  that  all  are  called  upon  to  per- 
form there,  and  not  the  empty  entertainment  of 
the  eye  or  the  ear.  But  should  this  be  preferred, 
and  an  undue  respect  to  the  luxury  of  sound  be 
allowed  to  temper  the  spiritual  service,  the  bad 
effects  cannot  fail  to  appear.  Surely  the  coun- 
tenance of  him  who  is  Lord  of  the  church,  can- 
not be  expected  in  such  worship.  He  cannot, 
will  not  be  imposed  on  by  pretences  to  improving 
his  service;  while,  at  same  time,  we  are  seeking 
our  own  pleasure  in  a  way  which  he  hath  not  ap- 
pointed. 

If  a  view  to  increase  the  number  of  attendants 

on  public  worship  give  influence  to  the  measure, 

rest  assured,  that  it  is  an  unhappy  policy,  indeed, 

that  never  will  be  blessed,  nor  what  it  aims  nf 

19 


2)8 

realized.     The  state  of  the  churches  which  have 
exercised  such  helps  in  devotion  and  attend- 
ance,   sufficiently   demonstrates    the   benefits  af- 
forded in  both,  or  in  either  of  these  respects* 

A-  nothing  is  more  shocking,  on  reflection,  than 
that  of  the  idea  of  intelligent  beings,  professing 
to  meet  for  the  worship  of  an  omniscient  and  holy 
God  ;  and  yet  mocking  him  by  a  fictitious,  instead 
pf  a  real,  regard;  or  by  praising  him  in  a  way 
more  adapted  to  their  own  amusement  than  to  the 
purity  of  his  worship;  so  is  it  still  an  aggravation 
of  this,  when  introduced  in  an  unauthorised  or  un- 
sanctioned manner.    In  such  service,  even  the  or- 
ganist and  bellows-blower  are  criminally  made  to 
attend  to  mechanical  exertion,  for  the  production 
of  senseless  sounds,  while  the  praises  of  God  are 
going  on  and  they  standing  in  his  presence,  for  the 
purpose  of  pleasing  or  serving  their  fellow  men. 
In  what  light  can  we  suppose  God  to  be  looking 
down  upon  such  a  scene,  where  many  are  waiting 
on  him  only  in  appearance,  but  in  reality  serving 
themselves?     Let  such  things,  therefore,  as  have 
no  connexion  with  true  devotion,  be  removed  to 
where   they  may  innocently  be  enjoyed.     They 
have  no  business  in  our  churches.     Why  should 
they  who  desire  them,  seek  to  place  theft]  there, 
to  the  annoyance  of  others,  or  to  the  general  in- 
jury of  the  church  ?      Can  they  not  be  induced  to 
attend  in  the  house  of  God,  unless  it  be  rendered 
a  more  amusing  place  f     Even  a  thing,  in  itself 
indifferent,  loses  that  nature,   and  become-  offen- 
sive,   when    either   misused  or    misplaced:    And 
misplaced  every  thing  must  !><',  and  especially  in 
public  worship,   if  intended  to  gratifj  the  proud 
and  vain,   rather  than  the  humble   and  contrite 


219 

worshipper;  or,  in  other  words,  that  is  better 
calculated  to  please  men,  than  Him  who  is  to  be 
worshipped  only  "  in  spirit  and  in  truth." 

All  the  various  appendages  of  instruments, 
choirs,  chantries,  dresses,  altars,  pictures,  im;» 
Sec.  kc;  that  enormous  mass  of  worthless  things 
that  overwhelmed  religion,  have,  from  time  to 
time, been  introduced  under  like  specious  pretexts 
of  being  innocent,  and  helpful  to  devotion;  and 
as  being  in  themselves  solemn,  decent  incentives  to 
piety  and  the  service  of  God;  producing  reverence 
in  the  beholders  and  hearers,  &;c.  But  is  it  a  truth 
of  which  Presbyterians  require  to  be  convinced,  or 
even  informed,  that  all  these  things  became  a  nox- 
ious, pestilent  heap,  under  which  the  religion  of 
Christ  long  groaned,  and  had  almost  expired  i 
Our  ancestors  at  the  Reformation,  of  immortal  me- 
mory, cleared  off  the  very  rubbish  of  their  ruins; 
and  embraced  only  the  rational  and  spiritual  wor- 
ship of  Jehovah,  in  all  the  simplicity  of  spontane- 
ous prayer,  praise,  and  administration  of  the  ordi- 
nances of  the  Gospel.  And  though  splenetic  wit, 
and  interested  prejudice,  have  designated  the  pure 
state  of  the  Presbyterian  church,  as  too  bare,  and 
"  stript  until  it  was  torn;"  yet  the  impartial  word 
of  revelation  describes  it  differently ;  while  the 
imaginary  benefits,  fancied  by  those  who  retained 
so  much  of  that  so  well  fitted  to  strike  the  mere 
external  senses  of  men,  have  never  been  such  as 
to  afford  any  reason  for  regret  for  their  rejection 
from  our  service  in  the  sanctuary.  If  so,  why 
should  we  attempt,  even  in  a  legitimate  way,  to 
bring  them  back  ? 

The  dishonest  attempt  to  cheat  mankind  into  a 
reverence  of  holy  things,  by  show,  and  sound, 
and  pomp,  "has  verily  had  its  reward."   To  one 


220 

part  of  this  system  of  vanity,  however,  we  have 
long  assented.  We  have  indulged  our  clergymen 
with  a  sanctified-like  costume,  at  which  their  pre- 
decessors of  the  Reformation  would  have  spurned 
with  indignation;  not  on  account  of  the  sable  as- 
pect of  the  vesture  itself,  but  merely  from  the  con- 
sciousness of  their  being  in  need  of  no  such  ap- 
pendage,— merely  external.  To  this  indulgence 
we  are  now  adding  that  of  organs,  and  choral 
music.  To  be  honoured  with  titular  rank,  de- 
grees and  dignities,  comes  in,  next  in  course ;  so 
that  by  and  by  it  seems  that,  step  by  step,  we 
shall  get  back  to  the  point  from  which  we  started 
at  the  Reformation  ;  and  thus  verify  the  predic- 
tive taunts  of  all  the  enemies  of  the  simplicity  of 
the  Gospel. 

Here  permit  me  to  leave  you,  Gentlemen,  with 
my  very  friendly  respects,  though  with  the  feel- 
ings of  an  injured  member. 

Your  obedient  servant,  &c. 

J.  M. 


I 


